Hello and welcome to the Skills Provision podcast. We hope all of our listeners out there are well, on today's episode, we are going to be discussing job descriptions. What are their pros, what are their cons? What are their uses, looking at it from different people's viewpoints with regards to recruitment on today's episode, there's myself, Francesca, there's also Chris Hi there, and there's also Pete Hi. So first of all, what are some of the advantages of job descriptions? I'll kick us off. So having a clear and accurate job description in your job postings helps determine job seekers fit for the role and evaluate their skills and abilities. And that's coming from the HR Evangelist. Now, would you agree with that statement? Who's? The HR Evangelist. Someone well, someone who calls themselves the HR Evangelist. So in terms of they've kind of appointed themselves as that, but it's to do with sprout PH from accurate job descriptions. So do you believe that having a job description is an accurate and clear way of showcasing what the job is going to entail? I would make it simpler than that. You don't go shopping unless you know what you want to buy, and the job description is a means of creating a shopping list covering the areas that you think are important. If that's what the HR evangelist said, then I agree. If it's not what he said, then I disagree. So from my perspective, when I have a job description from a company and they're wanting us to say, I don't know, an electrical engineer, they may have on paper what they describe as their perfect candidate. And anyone out there who's ever been involved in recruitment will know that their wish lists can be short. They can be long, and some of them can just be ridiculous when they're looking for that perfect candidate. So those job descriptions can be sometimes too specific, in my opinion, and it doesn't always encompass actually looking for someone that is necessarily realistically going to be out there. They're looking for that perfect fit. But how often do you ever find the perfect fit for a job? Rarely, especially in the It sector where you said about the shopping list of requirements. And as you know, we stopped working with some of the world leaders in that area because their job descriptions are completely unrealistic. Pete, you obviously help and have helped a lot with regards to creation of adverts and kind of making sure that the adverts and things that we put out on our site are attractive for job seekers, but also kind of illustrate what is going to be expected with that role. What do you think about when a job description is shared from a company? Do you believe they are valuable? No. In this section, you're discussing the positives and pros of a job description. And because I am negative anti job description in every shape and form, I have nothing to say. Okay, until we come to the part on the negativity of the job descriptions and how they are killing the job market. Okay, I'll come back to you then. So some other benefits they can help with the filtering process. Because if you do have that list of key requirements that someone might have, it does mean that you have something to compare it to. So it may be that they need to have disqualification. What if they don't have that qualification and it's not listed? It can help with that filtering process. And this is something that we'll come back to on the disadvantages. It doesn't necessarily account for every eventuality. Could I just say something here? Employers have to start somewhere and where do they start if they don't have a job description? How are they going to communicate internally and externally what they're actually looking for? I think it's important to look at it and we'll come on to this perhaps a bit further on, is that to look at it from both sides, from the actual physical, necessary recruitment point of view, and then an internal point of view because there are differences between what you need to be putting out from an advert point of view versus what you may have internally for the HR team. So having that job description in house, from an HR perspective, obviously they're going to be wanting to have clear guidelines and clear things that are expected of a candidate because it can help with management of the candidate's performance and knowing what that candidate should be doing. And equally for the candidate, it acts as kind of a level of protectionism. And it's like, well, in my job description, I have been told to do this and that, and if it's not mentioned, then sometimes that can help protect them from and this is something where, again, I know. Pete, you said you don't see it as a positive, but I wanted to ask you because you're involved heavily with our profile system, and job seekers often are applying for specific roles. Do you see that job descriptions and job adverts that are advertised can be helpful for those job seekers when creating their resumes or profiles because they're looking to address specific words or specific key terms that perhaps someone has put in an advert problem when discussing job descriptions. Adverts recruitment is to break it down into online. So recruitment as a process traditionally is probably heavily biased towards having quality job descriptions which lead into quality employment contracts. And how can you source people in the traditional sphere without that information? Then when you go online, the game changes dramatically and the need for the job description becomes gray. There was always a need for an employment contract. So the key elements of the employment contract are exactly the same as the key elements of a job description. Generally, these are the jobs that you're going to be employed to do and those are the key elements which don't have to go into big reams of a big document of a job description because it's not needed. As I'll get into down, this podcast can be counterproductive in terms of sourcing talent and quality. So this is where online operates one way, traditional operates another. There is crossover, but there are also unique differences between the pair. And I think that a lot of the time when we're discussing recruitment as a subject, we don't grasp fully that nearly everyone nowadays, including us, are online recruiters. Going back to your point about the crossover. Of course, especially internally, a skills provision. The keywords and the words used on a profile combined with the keywords and words used on a CV resume and the job adverts are crucial because they allow us to when you're dealing on an industrial mass scale, call form bonds and synergy where these people may be suited where are you going? It's the online part that causes confusion and at times frustration for the non technically minded, I guess. Okay, we'll come back onto the more of the negative or the downside perhaps of job descriptions. Chris, what other positives would you say there are to job descriptions? If I'm an employer, my approach would be that I have to sell the situation internally before I even attempt to go externally to look for workers. And there needs to be a communication tool. Keywords just won't appear from nowhere, they have to be put down somewhere and a convenient means of doing that is within a job description. I can run through the main aspects that you'd expect to see within the job description, but most of those would be known to anyone who's been involved in the recruitment market. But there are wider issues, such as cultural fit, that needs to be covered within job descriptions, which is often omitted. So to me, if you haven't got a job description that's been improved, sorry, approved internally, you're not ready to go to market. I think that's an interesting point though, in terms of it's often, and again this is probably swinging towards the negative, is that job descriptions state the factual aspects about or the specific parts that they're wanting to see. But often when you have a discussion, or I find when I have a discussion with a company about the type of person they're looking for, those are the sort of things that unless you have a conversation and kind of break those down, those are often the things that you don't necessarily see in the job description. It is more about the person. And that is where a job description doesn't really factor in necessarily about a person, it factors in about their potential certifications. Do you know what I mean? It might say, oh, we'd like someone that is high attention to detail or something like that, but it doesn't necessarily mean that that person is going to present those skills. I'm not sure if I've articulated that very well, what I would say is we're discussing the difference between no job description, a poor job description, an adequate job description and a good job description. And you've got to have something to work from. If we get a phone call from someone saying, oh, we need you to find us a whatever it is, what's our first question going to be? Have you got a job description that you can share with us? Because we need to have a point of reference from which we can start. I would say that most job descriptions are inadequate when you receive them for the first time. But even if they're only 60, 70, 80%, that is still better than nothing. It is very rare that we receive a job description that we don't amend before we go to market to look for people. And again, we'll come on to this discussion about job descriptions not necessarily being fit for purpose. But I think it's important to note that on certain roles, I definitely think especially where there is niche specialisms and they're very unique positions, you do need that more informed guidance from a company, but for those more general roles where there is not a lot of necessarily difference from one place to another. So maybe hairdressing, okay, the types of hair you might be cutting might be different, but typically the processes that you are doing will be very similar. So you wouldn't necessarily need that level of support and that content in a job description because it's going to be very much matter of fact. Things like, okay, your working hours might be something that's different or the pay, et cetera. But those are all separate things. So I don't agree entirely with your statement, but I don't disagree entirely with it. I think again, it comes on a case by case basis with the type of role you are recruiting for and where you are recruiting it for as well to use your hairdressing, one or another fairly low level skilled jobs, things like waiting and waitressing. You've got completely different markets in different parts of the world and different expectations. The Middle East is not forced down all the isms that we have in the west and if they don't want people to have tattoos, they simply say no tattoos. If they don't want people with piercings, they say no piercings. Yeah, and I think that is something actually that then we've listed some positives and things and I think now that kind of leads onto potentially the more negative side of job descriptions in that the universal there is no way to universally have a job description that applies to everything because we are international recruiters. So for us, the job description we may receive for one particular location wouldn't necessarily apply for someone from another location. When working with Pete, he's always saying to me about things like such as the driving license or the qualification, it's like, well actually, will that qualification be something that someone can get in their home country, or will that driving license be valid in these locations? Pete, did you want to add something there? No, it's fine. Now something else. And I think Pete, if he was hearing me say this five years ago, be very surprised. Looking at it specifically from online recruitment, nearly every job description that we will ever receive will be a regurgitation or copy and paste from another source that has already been used. And that source has been used ten times, ten times and ten times and ten times. So for us, when looking at the online side, we need to be very mindful that the content we're putting out is going to be attracting, as you say, the whole point of a job description, job advert is to attract that. We need to be maximizing that ability to do so, and we have to take the information provided by an employer and adapt it. I don't know if you want to add something on that, Pete, in terms of yes. And at last you're getting into the meat of the subject from the online point of view, those companies, recruitment agencies that don't buy their traffic, then there is problems, our problems, many problems. What defines a quality job adverts? At the top of that list, underlined many times is the word visibility, because without the visibility, there are zero applicants. So it starts with visibility, probably continues with elements related to visibility right to the end. So how do we produce visibility? The answer is by being technically astute and clever and not following the crowd and doing as everyone else does constantly, over and over. And then the trust element, job descriptions produced by companies, generally speaking, will be a semi regurgitation of something not written, too easy to just go online, get something that I'll do, just our company name there, and change those words. Our working times are slightly different to that, and then we'll change that, good to go. And then the recruitment agency can have that too, produce their adverts. And the recruitment agency may use the regurgitated job description along with possibly another regurgitation of an advert that they found that's on theme and join the two together to produce something that Google especially will have no interest in because Google wants to display pages that are beneficial to the readers and the uniqueness of something pages regurgitated 10,000 times. Google will look and say, well, the first two or three we will list and give some visibility to, but the other thousands and thousands we're not interested in. Well, obviously there's this problem, it's all contextual, the game of content and how you play the game of content and how you maximize the game of content to your benefit. Because we are, as I went back to the beginning, online recruiters, not recruiters. So we can take a job description, we could take anything formality and how something is I want 25 vehicle mechanics. I want this kind of could you record it on the tele? Record the conversation? This is the pay, these are the benefits, this is this. Thank you. Where you go recruiters. Generally, they like the copy and paste game. You send me the job description, I'll copy and paste it into an advert, remove a few words and there we go. And the world over, we just don't get the traffic. It was covered yesterday in an email that from Wave. I believe that 3000 visitors, most recruitment agencies list their adverts online. The average monthly visitors for a recruitment agency is 3000 per month. Why? Because they're dealing in regurgitated, duplicate content. So it's not the concept of the job description. And Chris is absolutely correct in what he says, 100% correct. But it's how we use how we play the game online. And I think that's the thing. It's differentiating. It isn't it for getting that initial shop window out there, if you will. We have to be very mindful that what we're putting out is as unique to get that interest. But when it comes to us doing our interviewing, our screening for our clients, we can be using these job descriptions that they have provided to us and other things, because those are internal, as Chris has kind of said in terms of internal documents, for making sure that someone is a fit for the role, but for getting the advertisement out there. That is where online job descriptions being repeated and repeated and repeated lose their strength and use and value because no one sees them. There are benefits, massive benefits. They're not seen by everyday people and recruiters or anything like that. And the fact is that the replication game that everyone's playing, the copy and the copy and I'll copy me, copy you, copy him, is fantastic for those that don't play the game. Yeah. What we're saying is that there is nothing wrong with job descriptions. As a tool. No. As a concept, it's a means to an end. And only idiots slavishly copy and paste into the online environment. That's what we're, the majors, are doing it daily. And I can prove that. Yeah, like you said, it's when people, if people have the monetary spend to bring in the traffic and be able to get the visibility of things, then they can afford to do those. But it's for those that don't have and obviously your major organizations, we all know who they are, they've got access to that. But people wonder at the other side why they're not getting any visibility. Well, that's one of the reasons. But if we just sidestep slightly as we're talking, obviously online is a big part of it, but just to give weight to perhaps more of the negative things of a job description in general. One of my biggest things I find now is, and I sort of already touched on it, depending on where we are looking for candidates, the job description does not apply and kind of encompass the realities of the market that you are entering into. So a role may say they need to have a bachelor's degree in whatever it might be, but if you're hiring for international, they may not necessarily do a bachelor's degree in that topic. They may do a different qualification or the equivalent qualification of a GCSE from one country to another. And those sort of things are a negative point from my perspective, of maybe employers. And it also then comes onto us to educate the employers and we do aim to do that about the transferable or similar skills. What would you say on that point, Chris, in terms of when you're speaking to employers? I think employers very often miss the fact that they're moving from their own country into an international environment. And one of the most irritating things is the use of local market acronyms that might apply in India but certainly wouldn't apply in Portugal. And acronyms do not travel well internationally. And the number of times I've had that conversation I don't care to remember. And getting people to actually expand the job description so that it's written in a form of English that people can understand. I was going to say, and that is another point that has always been reiterated to me and is that you've got to write it in a way that the job seekers on the other side are going to understand. And it's something that Pete's always hammering to me. The people that you're writing these jobs for, they are the job seekers. It's all well and good, an employer saying this, this and this, but they're not the ones applying for the job. So if the job seeker doesn't understand what's written in front of them, how are they going to know what they're applying for? And some of the lack of preparedness of people entering into international recruitment goes well beyond not having a job description that is adequate to even start the process. And you yourself come across this all the time in that they haven't given any thought to the approval of the candidates and the offering of a contract within a couple of days of saying, yes, we would like this person to join us. So often it happens six weeks later they're still trying to work out their contract offer. We don't suffer that anymore because we make it part of our terms and conditions that the offer letter is available before we start recruiting. But that's sometimes why international recruitment can appear to take an inordinate length of time. You something else that I would like to interject there, Francesca, if I may be talking about the fit, the qualifications and all this kind of stuff, is that as a former vehicle mechanic in the forces I worked with, over my period of time. Worked alongside or managed about 5000 Mechanics big places with a lot of people on the flip side of some small places as well. Now the head and shoulders stand out mechanic out of those 5000 wasn't actually a vehicle mechanic, it was an Albanian living in Kosovo, aircraft mechanic. And this is where I believe, and I'll get into it in a little bit in depth later, that we should be working. This is where we should be doing a skills provision and other people and organizations should be considering it as well because we have a database of a vast database of candidates. What we should be doing when people come knocking is working with them in terms of who we have available and the fit of those that we have available. Because as Chris said and Francesca as well, that they come and they want this, they want five years. This qualification. This qualification, this qualification. Well, one, the availability is probably going to be tight and two, why? And that question of why then sort of makes them think, well, yeah, why are you after that kind of person when you can have these people and within three months train them up and they'll be the best mechanics you've ever had. You've literally made the point that I was about to make, which was that you've got your essential criteria and your desirable criteria and that's something more and more that we're pushing with our clients that obviously if you're a doctor you're going to need X, Y and Z. You can't be a mechanic pretending to be a doctor sort of thing. But there are some like you say, if someone has worked in the meat industry they're going to have the life skills to probably work in the fish industry and those transferable skills. And I saw something the other day and I can't remember who'd written it, so I can't quote who said it. But basically if a candidate can do 80% of the job you should hire them because the other 20% is probably something they can learn. I would agree 100%. And it goes on to say, I know we often refer to your son as an example whereby they may have a remit or us as a recruiter we have a remit to find X position. But X position, you're competing against 1000 different companies that are looking for that. So the likelihood of not finding that person is quite high. But there is someone else that can do most of the job, so why not hire so someone that was they're wanting a lead pipe fit or whatever and well, this person doesn't actually have the experience but has the transferable skills. So then they've hired them. And it is being aware that those living in an ideal world thinking that the perfect person is going to come along, you may get lucky. And that's not to say that it never happens. We all have those success stories where someone has ticked every single box but it's very, very unlikely. But you also get the other situation. We've got one at present where the senior executive team defined the job description for a role and we came up with probably six or seven close matches as we saw them, only for the operational team to say these are too high power for the role. So this indeed reinforces the need to have the internal discussions very early on to agree between the parties within an organization exactly what they do want. And that was going to be my kind of last point before I sort of move this discussion on was that often the people that I am dealing with or us as recruiters are dealing with are often going to be the HR team or talent acquisition or whoever it may be. And they are our point of contact and the job descriptions and things that they maybe have provided are not necessarily going to be a true reflection of what it is like on the shop floor or in the elements because they are not the ones that are operating in those. And it's those additional things that maybe they might have the skeleton of Job but those additional things that someone who's in the coalface twenty four seven, the manager, the senior engineer, whatever it might be that is actually going to manage this person can offer that missing part, the actual key aspects that they are looking for beyond just can they tick this box and it's what's the right word? The tick boxing exercise to say, yes, they have this, yes, they have that. But unfortunately being able to have access to those people, those people are often the ones that are the busiest, that don't necessarily have the time to support the recruitment process. That just reinforces what I said a couple of minutes ago. You need to sell the job description internally before you try to go external with it. And we suffer that problem not hugely, but the one I just cited is very irritating because you've basically done all the work and you're within you think a couple of interviews and you'll have your placement. Whereas in this situation we're going to have to step back, try and evolve what they actually do want because they did not have that conversation internally. Some organizations I know a few have, take the HR and the decision makers from the nice warm offices and they go and work alongside or manually or whatever the workforce. Tom old Church Recycle had all the office staff working out on the Slaggie, processing coal, shoveling it onto the belts for one week come rain shine or whatever. So they knew what it was like. They knew what the job entailed. They knew the kind of people that it was suitable to rather than because if you're sitting in those nice warm offices with the doors and windows shut and all you're doing is answering emails and telephone calls, how can you make uniform decisions on who is good and who isn't good? And you have never done the job? Exactly. When it comes to the interview process, that is when hopefully again, those that do have more of that know how of what the job is really like are then involved. But from my perspective as a recruiter, that can be frustrating when then they turn around and say, well, no, none of these are quite right because they don't have this and this and this. When we found ten people that based on the information we've been provided of what they're looking for. But it's a challenge which raises the point that these people should be involved. Initially, what you find is the political landscaping companies is such that the divide between the worker and those in the offices, people out on the shop floor, the people in the cold is such that cooperation between both parties is poor. Which then leads the recruitment agency dealing with HR who are not getting supported by the line managers because of this divide working off archaic and best job descriptions or whatever in terms of getting adverts out there. And then when you do rightly call for these people to be involved at the end of the process, of course they're going to sit around and say, I don't know what you got these people for, none of these are suitable. That's the right answer. But the wrong part of this is they should be involved from the get go, obviously, but they probably feel that they have their nose put out a joint because they keep asking for a certain type of person because no one knows the job better than people on the shop floor. Exactly. And when I used to run large companies, operations were required to sign off on every job description so that they didn't have or it limited the misinformation that we've just been talking about. So it's all manageable and soluble with decent processes within companies. So to me, job descriptions is a tool. How companies choose to use it is down to them. But if we get some scrappy bit of paper or inadequate information, then we just call them out and say, what about this, this and this, and send them back to the drawing board. Yeah. And that's where it's also important, is that for us, when we create our advertisements, we share it with the company so that they've got a chance to say if there's any changes or anything that they want to make, anything that's missing, they can add those because we want to make sure that we're going off the correct information. Does it mean there's 100% chance? Imagine a life with no job description, nothing. Imagine a life with no job, the need for no job advert, which is partly where I'm trying to go. Imagine a time where the employer comes to us with HR, with other people involved in the chain and we have the available time half a day and we go. Through our database and they're all like him, I like her. Like shopping. The shopping basket. Put that in the shopping basket. I love him. Two of them. We've got 75 possibles in there or all of different variations, different qualifications, different age groups, different ethnicity, some could be disabled, some could be anything. Then the fine grading comes through. Yeah, this one would be interesting. What are you going to never done the work before. No one's seen a job description. These are the people that are doing the hiring, that are looking at our database and doing the shopping, selecting who they want, let them choose. Those days are coming. All the advert, if we can get rid of the adverts, the job descriptions and everything and just work off the live database and let people shop employers, that's where I want to take it. And so I don't see the need in the future. Further job description. I understand the concept. I think it's one of those things, it's like making a drop in the ocean sort of thing that I think the processes and things are so ingrained with people. I think it's something that can be run alongside something. But I suppose if you're on the other side and you are the employer, you want to be making sure from your perspective that you've got something that you are measuring these people against to make sure that you are selecting the right sort of people because otherwise they've never had the opportunity to go shopping before. That's the problem. No, I suppose a database of available people that's on theme, obviously it's filtered down maybe 2345 times before they get to that stage where they're looking at related people and like, oh yeah, we like this, we like that's. Online recruitment at its best and moving away from archaic CVS job descriptions. And we haven't even covered yet why job descriptions are so poor. Okay, so just for moving things along then. So just to differentiate, because something we mentioned about was a job description as an employment contract. A job description outlines kind of the duties, responsibilities, skills, requirements of the role and what a job seeker can be expecting to do within that role. Whereas the employment contract is covering sort of the terms and conditions, payments type, payment cycles, hours rosters, the location, any legal entitlements, et cetera. So job descriptions within the international market then? We have touched on some of the things, but what are the kind of feelings towards the job descriptions in the international market? One thing I've already touched on is the terms being used and you've also touched on it, Chris, about acronyms or colloquialisms or things that maybe don't have that transferable level to them. Do you think when it comes to the international side or when you're looking, do you think there should be more than one for local candidates versus international candidates, a different contract of employment, no job description, sorry. In terms of. Do you think that when you're looking in the local market, for example, to say you are a UK business looking in the UK, do you think you should be looking based on one kind of remit and then looking for something different when you're looking internationally, or do you think you should be looking for the same? No, they're looking for the skills that they require to fulfill the role that they want people to do. It doesn't matter whether they come from the planet Zog, Greenland or Greenwich, it shouldn't matter at all. But one thing I'd like to just go back to, all companies operate on a hierarchical basis and I just don't ever see people having their complete management teams sifting through a short list of candidates. That's why they have hierarchical structures so that different people do different roles. Like we kind of said, wasn't it, about the operational staff are often the reason that they don't get involved in things is because they are in that coalface all the time. So for them being able to step back and be involved in a process such as that, whilst it could help the business massively by reducing wastage in terms of the time and interviewing incorrect people because they're getting more involved in it, the realisticness realisticness of it all, it may never get there. I think the main problem is that operations, the people that are going to be using these workers, are not involved in the decision making adequately. And why businesses don't do that, I don't know. We find it much more effective when we're dealing with clients, if we're dealing with operational people because they know what they want, whereas sometimes board directors are too divorced from the realities and HR may not have any feeling at all for operational matters. But we're not there to tell companies how they should structure themselves. No, but we can advise and make suggestions about those that should be included. Is there anything else or people involved? Something that I like to try and make sure I know is that who is going to be involved in the interview process for a candidate? So that is someone going to be making those decisions that is going to be actually utilizing them or be involved in the management? And basically that sort of information should be in a top quality job description. Yeah. Not necessarily something that's going to go just to be clear, not something that's going to go out, not an outwardly facing, like, job advert on the online, but something for us as a recruiter to be discussing with our candidates. Yes. You might remember this from a few years ago when we were more heavily into it than we are at the moment, is that some of the big boys, they wanted to have seven rounds of interviews. Now, that was just, in my opinion, ridiculous. We tried it for a little while. The number of placements we made were very small, and there was zero profitability to actual losses. Trying to work with these people. Now, to me, absolute most, you need three interview levels. Absolute most. I believe that in most organizations that actually know what they want, they should be able to do it with a couple of rounds, and establishing that process upfront can save you an awful lot of time. Hmm. Pete, in terms of because you're the furthest removed in this conversation from dealing with employers day to day, what's your viewpoint on the employers want to hold on to job descriptions or Hrs wanting to use job descriptions? Are there any kind of thoughts or feelings you have? I think that the level of hypocrisy is quite high from recruitment agencies, because I hear it said a lot that the employer, they don't even know who they're looking for. They're not recruitment ready. We've got all these people, we've wasted I don't know how much time, and now the goal posts are changing again. And you think, who's the full the employer that you know is not ready, they're not prepared, they don't know who they want. They haven't considered the alternatives because it's a little bit like the problems that I deal with with you, Francesca, where you look at it from the recruiter's point of view, but you're doing something that's related to the job seeker getting you to change mindset. And you say yourself it's not an easy switch over going from gamekeeper or gamekeeper to porch. So we know that most employees are not ready. We know that they're disorganized. We know that a lot of the pressures internally incorporate within is such that it's an imperfect world out there. We sometimes call on perfection for the little bit that we want, which is laughable, and then we make it thing by using words in such a way that counteracts what we're trying to achieve. So it's like if everything is as we say it is, they don't know what they want, they're looking for the wrong people, they're not flexible enough, all these things, then their job descriptions are not going to be worth the paper they're written on because they're just not going to be good enough. The job description really initially shouldn't be called a job description and should be a blank piece of paper that when we discuss with all elements of a company, not just the HR manager that's never left the office in 25 years, who are you actually after and why? And then putting our own suggestions in and looking at our own availability database to see who's out there. All right, we might not have specifics, but it will give us a generic for who's available, who we can find, and then into alternatives which we talk about, which where they won't have even thought about bit like the job advert. You start talking about job adverts, job descriptions, and you start getting into the semantic, into the complicated area of duplicate content and all that. An eagle eye was not even related. Well, it is related. Massively. If you want to be successful, this is success. How were we more successful? How are recruiters more successful? By being more aligned to the employer and not just saying, pass me a job description, I know you rubbish. We'll not discuss that. The fact that you even want to use an agency shows that you're not that good. So now can you pass me a job descriptions that I know are going to be crap? And all this why? And it all comes down to like Forbes reported, the job description is obsolete. These written statements of responsibilities, duties, required qualifications, and reporting relationships of a position are ineffective. Startups. They can be even harmful, losing a chance to make a connection with a critical hire and to notify a company's brand message. In many ways, the ineffectiveness of job descriptions and the need to rethink how to approach potential job candidates reflects significant changes in the talent marketplace. Why is talent so hard to find? Half of all small businesses say the top challenge they face is hiring new employees onto a little bit of data. Even business owners and managers who nod in agreement at the statement may not fully appreciate the reasons for the challenge. First, hiring has become a buyer's market. The most talented people, the ones that can take the company to a new level, are secure in their positions and are looking for new jobs passively, if at all. These are the people least likely to be engaged by a job description. No wonder job descriptions tend to be one size fits all, bland overviews written from a company point of view, this approach can be satisfactory for entry level jobs, but it will not hook passive job seekers at a higher level. For that, a hiring manager and HR partner should spend time together to really understand the business needs. Finding Employees angels consider a new approach to attracting talent. Talent after proven fundraising to adult I'm not really sure what this is going into. Actually, I was reading this Netflix a decade ago. One company that tapped into this idea early was Netflix. Back in 2009, Netflix unveiled its original Culture Deck, its 129 page SlideShare, which laid out the seven aspects of its culture for current and potential employees in compelling detail. Job applicants who went through the Culture Deck found all sorts of details about the company's values descriptions describing the ideal candidate as you focus on great results rather than processes, you learn rapidly and eagerly, and you contribute effectively outside of your speciality. Netflix summarized its approach this way entertainment, like friendship, is a fundamental human need. It changes how we feel and gives us common ground. Netflix is better entertainment at lower cost and greater scale than the world has ever seen. We want to entertain everyone and work that make the world smile. Talent Officer of Netflix quoted he was surprised that the onidorn set of 127 slides, no music, no animation, nor go viral. However, in retrospect, it seemed common sense that millions of job seekers will be captivated by the culture deck. So basically and it goes on and on and on. It's almost like a new way, the online way of these are the values of the company, these are the type of people we're looking for. And then obviously you're opening up then to the imperfect can become the perfect by fitting. Yeah. And that's where it's like really in some ways, currently, I'd say if you looked at a job description, you've got more on the essential skills versus the desirable skills, when in some ways it should be more on less essential skills, more desirable skills. But if you can, obviously, like I say, every job is different. And there will be some where you physically cannot do certain jobs if you don't have those qualifications, those whatever. But on those where there is take sales, I suppose, where there's a lot of transferable skills, what are the actual real core skills that someone needs to have? Well, it might be communication might be considered more of a core skill than necessarily, oh, you've got to have had five years of experience versus two years of experience. Or someone who's done five years may have actually performed nowhere near as good as the person in two years when you can compare the results that they've had. So I understand what you're saying. And what that article is saying about job description is something that we will be working on in the future where we move into employer directories and then developing and opening this out and allowing them to sell themselves effectively to the marketplace so that they start attracting the people they want through us. Because you can imagine that. And I see all the time in the adverts that we're banging out that this sort of like, you need this, you need this, you need this, you need this, you need this, you need this. It's like and if they're not available, it's almost like so you just turn around to the HR and the recruitment and say, and what if they're not available? And they just look at the puzzle, like, where you just go further if you go to Africa or go to you're like, yeah, what if they're not there? These techies, they get that much pay, they're not available. And that's where it comes down to the whole 80 2070, isn't it, in terms of how much of a role someone can do. And that's, again, something that we try to educate our employees is that they need to be open minded. And when we're presenting to them, we are giving a wide spectrum of candidates, from those that are perhaps overqualified, to those that are qualified, to those that may be slightly underqualified. Say they've asked for five years, but this person's got three years but we think that they're a really strong candidate. We are for advocating for those that we think can do the job and obviously we are not in that company day in, day out, and that's something that we do have to obviously respect. But what we can do is advise and give guidance from what we see in the marketplace or what we see as our experience, which businesses are being successful in international recruitment, those that are investing in the process, that actually you've got to be interested. Yeah. And they are prepared to go against the general norms, the extra mile, and they provide top quality information and they make it easy for the recruiter to understand their objectives, which makes it easier for the recruiter to be able to create unique adverts for the internet, which is the main catchment area these days. It makes it easier for people viewing it to answer a lot of their questions from the information provided and decide whether the culture within the company, advertising for people or the agency on behalf of the company, are producing something that is of interest to them. Now, whether you call it a culture deck or whatever you call it, it doesn't matter. It's all about the quality of the information. Yeah. Again, I saw something and I can't remember the exact numbers, but it's like the reasons for why people look for new employment. And obviously money is one thing, but it is about the environment and those sort of supporting documents, the more about the companies can often mean what is going to sell something. Like, we've had some really nice examples from the employers that have bought into that process about what their company values are, what they're going to do to support them, things in the local area, these are the things you can do, rough cost of, all of those sort of things. That if you're a job seeker, especially that's considering an international move, any of that supporting stuff is what's going to be the determining factor between yeah. And we are very much at this point in time, in my opinion, in a candidate led market, where the candidates have got more choice about where they want to go, what roles they want to take up, necessarily, rather than employers expecting, well, we're just going to chuck this out there. Yeah, we'll find someone, because we've always found someone previously, when actually the marketplace has evolved from when they were last looking for that role. Potentially, the world has changed. It's not just our own domestic market. The whole of Europe is suffering skills shortages as well, as is North America and Australia, new Zealand, remember, we're actually making placements into India. Who would ever have thought that ten years ago? So what is next, then, for job descriptions in terms of things? What changes do we see happening? I would say they need to be much I don't care what you call it, if the word job description is offensive and it's called memorandum of needs or whatever you want to call it. I don't care what it's called, but it should be a very full and detailed document signed off by whoever needs to sign it off internally within the company before they begin to look externally. And if they have struggled in national markets and feel they need to look across borders, they need to spend some time either researching themselves or entering into conversations with people like us or visa specialists. So they've got a broad understanding of what more they need to do and that they are realistic as to the cost that they're going to incur and the time frames that are going to be involved. We know that if we were to get a call today from a new client and it involved visa requirements, you're probably talking two to three months at best, probably slightly longer. Now, why is this happening? It's because of global skill shortages. I saw a question this morning about what's happening in Germany. Now, Germany used to be a very tight market. If you didn't speak German, you couldn't get into Germany. It's changing. They are relaxing the rules in terms of their own visa requirements. This is happening all around the world because employers can't find the talent that they want. So the world is changing because the circumstances in the world have changed and having the information to hand, like you say, whatever you call it, a job description is still viewed currently as obviously one of the primary things, but it should be part of an overall kind of remit about the position. And one of the things that we see more and more or ask and ask for more and more, especially with the international and considering those transferable skills, is the use of video in that being able to showcase potential job seekers about what the role is actually going to look like. Because there is that balance of something. And the way that we operate in the UK, in the EU, in your first world countries, we have access to a lot more premium resources than candidates that are in third world countries. But that does not mean that the work that they are doing in those third world countries doesn't transfer to the first world countries. But it's connecting those things. And video has become a very useful tool. And I'd like to have two points as far as that's concerned. One is that companies are not making enough use of video themselves when they're going to market. If they've got a good story to tell, why don't they tell the story on a video? Because it's a lot easier for people to absorb the information from a video than it is from ten pages of closely written narrative. And then also to go back to something that Pete mentioned about business directories, which I would imagine would involve some form of brand building within those directories so that companies can actually express what they're looking for. That's going to be an integral part of it. Sorry to interject something that you said to me, Pete, and this is just about generally about how people consume content and that you said, for example, your children wouldn't have a TV license or anything because they don't watch anything on TV. They're more likely to have a premium subscription to YouTube or something like that. And video is becoming such a good way, or the short film. Video content is a way of people consuming that information. That's right. The problem with job descriptions and they need to be just set fire to across the world is and started afresh an area I'm going to be working in extensively, is it needs to become a marketing task, because the problem with job descriptions and everything related is it's always when the need is there. Oh, we've got a contract. Oh, my God. We need 10,000 workers. What are we going to do? Get every agency in the world paying, whatever. Just get the workers. Can't find the workers. Oh, my God. Now what we're going to do, I'm going to get the suit. You start it off as a marketing task and you develop it and you grow it and you keep growing it and you keep working at it. Selling the company, the ethos, the mission statements, the kind of people we're looking for, the direction that we're going in with the young people, as you say, Francesca, and all of this needs to be so you don't need a job description. Recruiters don't need job descriptions because they know they're going to be rubbish anyway, but they need to know the kind of people they're working for in depth. All right, so these are the kind of people that they're after. So we can now start building up. I've got more information here than I've ever had from a job description. I can write adverts below, I can utilize the company's, ethos, messages, everything. It's all there for me. Lords of it, tons of it, more than I've ever had before. And by doing this, we start moving away from the and you can utilize video in the delivery of these messages because the final move of the chessboard is one that checkmates all those that believe job descriptions have a place in the modern world, because it doesn't. And that is internally and skills provision. I would say that on this podcast we have some fantastic recruiters, some fantastic brains, knowledge, diversity, innovative thinkers, crossboard that I would probably match up against any other team. But what do we really have? And what would skills provision be looking for if they were looking for us today? Next corporate banker who run a salmon factory? A female that finished university with a degree in PE teaching, or an ex Remy vehicle mechanic? I don't think so. Absolutely not. We wouldn't get a sniff, we wouldn't get looked at, we wouldn't even be considered. But here we are. And that's the thing. You don't know what people are going to get the right people with the right substance inside them. Unlike with Chris depth of knowledge, a lifetime of it is you can make it's almost like by looking for the perfect you're almost strangling yourself and your business because that's what everyone else is doing. And it's almost like, so how do I position my business? We've got massive contracts coming in. We've got all that we need. We're now desperate. We need well, just keep doing the same as you've always done. Just keep doing the same as everyone else is doing. Yeah. And that's all everybody's doing. And this is why and in the modern world you start thinking, hang on a minute. So if everyone on the orgs, if we say like, who's in the North Sea at this moment in time? My boy is he's 23. So then everyone that's doing artisan type work in the North Sea at this moment in time, what's the average age? And it was like 50, but it will be far off. High 40s, maybe low 50s. Where's the future then? 1015 years time, where are the next batch actually coming from? We don't want to know. We don't want to talk about it. We don't want to think about it because we don't have the answer. And this is where by taking complicated subjects like the job description and most of the problems that the job description doesn't answer, the sourcing, the imperfect is probably the thing. Or selling the company Ethos message brand, and as we said earlier with Netflix, their talent deck or whatever it was called, is giving companies out there the tools to start selling themselves so that people are lining up for a job. So you got this constant conveyor belt spitting them in. Oh yeah, these are good. Yeah, we'll say. And that's what we're moving away from this. What sometimes suffocates the online is the traditional, because traditional thinkers are trying to make traditional ideals fit their model or fit their brains. It comes from business to business, doesn't it, as well, because the way a business has done something versus the way another business does something completely different and what team that they've got within that and the people that they've gone within that. And there are some people that definitely and some businesses that you talk to are definitely a lot more forward thinking. And then there are some where through various different reasons, you have to be forward thinking. But also it's almost like fighting the battles on your terms. Being microsoft went up against Google search for like forever and Blue, god knows how much money, trillion maybe not far off will be them. We just got more money and Google would just sat unconquerable. Still are maybe. And then Bing went, hey, what? We'll fight you in a different battlefield with different tools. And we'll now use something called Chat GPT and we'll change the whole game. And Google are then we haven't thought about that. We're not making any promises. And then the whole game starts getting changed. And this is the it's fast moving. So you go to companies, you speak to companies and what are you doing? What do you mean? And they haven't even got a job description for the jobs they're wanting to your company. Is that where you want to go? But we don't know what we're doing in this HR kind of thing. And recruitment is the core of development because without recruitment, there's no growth. So it's almost like people like me, it's my job to absorb these. And the problems are good because the problems make you come out with the solution if you can ever have to develop them, and then give the tools back to the user, the employer. And that's what we tend to do. We're doing it with the job seekers, with the profiles, we're going to be doing it with the employers. The same kind of thing is allowing for this free movement of people where the restrictions imposed by things like job descriptions are just not even out there. The cleaner that's now working in Ici could be the next CEO of a massive software company that doesn't even know it. Yeah, there's a lot more options now, isn't it, out there? Whereas back when you went to school, Chris, it's like, you'd do this, you'd do that, and there are certain pathways, and that was the only pathway that was available. But it's now, even for me, compared to when I went to school, the options are out there. Now. If I could go back and do things again, I would do things completely differently. Because it's evolved so much in you mean you would listen? I wouldn't go so far to say that. That's a bit that's us asking a bit much, to be honest. I think obviously this is going off topic slightly, but when you're in school, you're so young to make informed decisions at that age that can impact your future. That's a lot to be putting on your shoulders when realistically, it's almost like I feel like what you should happen is when you finish, you should get chucked into two or three. Almost do like a placement year if you will. And you pick your three industries that you're going to go into that you might think you want to go into, and you do three, four months placements at those. And then it gives you a better understanding of realistically what it's going to be like. I'm going to copyright that idea a minute, and then you can make uniform decisions. That you're right. And it does start at the young age, where it's almost like the schools are giving too much power to the young people and getting them to be their own masters of their own destiny. And. They're just like, well, that sounds good, let's have a go at that. I like playing tennis, go down the sports road. I'm never going to earn anything, I'll probably never get a job. But that'll do. But actually, at the same time, it kind of goes back to the point you made about why we are where we are and why we do well at what we do. Is that because we went down those different routes, actually, sometimes that can be a positive. And that's the kind of thing that I've been talking about, where the imperfect can actually be the perfect. People look at us and say, well, I wouldn't have you guys doing my recruitment. But actually because it's almost like that you're not tainted by convention. Yeah, you think differently, that this is what we need. This is what we need in this organization. We need people that will got the strength to stand up and the strength not to follow the status quo. Rock the ball, not follow the status quo. And to make changes that will it's almost like we're at this fifth Industrial revolution or whatever, it's change time. And people that were coming towards are still batting. They're still batting off the like, where are these people? Hang on. You came to us five years ago saying exactly the same thing with the same piece of paper and things. What have you done? Nothing. I'll pay 20% more. See, this is the problem in corporate land because it's money. I'll just pay more. It will work to some degree, but you can't buy your way out of everything and whilst you can buy your way out of manpower, actually bods on the ground the quality of those people, that's questionable, isn't it? And it's often a short term it's a short term thing, isn't it? Someone's going to move for that short term five p increase. Well, then six months later, someone else down the road might offer another five. And it's not a long term solution, but just to continue the conversation towards where we see the future going, obviously you touched on Chat GPT and that is something that seems to be being heavily used with regards to different things. I know I shared it wasn't necessarily just a recruitment, but an article the other day saying about that people were using it to work multiple full time jobs because it could do 80% of their job. And today there's an announcement that there's auto GBT. So things are moving forward at pace. But just to come back to what we're talking about, we're talking about education again. This seems to be a very common would agree, Chris, all of it, this whole podcast, that word, whether you're for or against or in the middle, education runs through all of it, doesn't it? Education and progression is out of it, isn't it? And we try to educate, we struggle, obviously, but what can we do? We can only do so much can't we you know what I mean? We're here to support and sometimes you will change. And I've had a couple where they said, look, we'll take your advice or, Please, can you give us some guidance? And there are those that are open minded, but you do get those that are not so open minded. And you have to respect you are there to service the employer, but if they're expecting you to find something that is unrealistic, we will tell someone that we're happy to give things a go and we will turn down jobs. And that surprises employers when they get a no from us, because the package may not be right. We quite accept that others may have a different point of view to ours, but what I would say the most encouraging thing for us as a business recently has been old customers coming back for more people, recent companies introducing us to other companies, which must be the best form of endorsement you can probably get. So we've had an hour or so knocking the systems, but in many ways they are still working. Just to pause you on that, though, Chris, but actually, if we'd gone, yes, obviously we're seeing the success, but that is because the actions that we're doing are going against those norms. So the reasons why we're getting the visibility is because we're making these changes. The reason we're doing this is because we're doing this. So it proves that our variation of the model within recruitment is actually working. And I need to almost go back to the opening comment about call it what you will, but a job description, whatever it's going to be called, needs to be there. But it needs to be there for the employer as much as it needs to be there for the recruiter. And it is but a tool on the journey towards successful recruitment and also for the employee or job seeker. Again, it's a tool. The amount of times I get asked is like, do you have a job description? Can you tell me more about the requirements? And I'll say yes. I do. But it is, as you say, a mere tool. Let me ask you a question, then. If you had to do three things to better educate the employer on the need to be better prepared before they enter into the international recruitment market, what would be your advice out at the bottom of your own workforce? Achieve always the cleaning staff and work your way upwards and get promoted unbiased? Genuine feedback from all on the company, the mistakes being made, the good and the bad, because those sitting in the big chairs at the top, generally, I could be working in a place where I just haven't stopped mourning for about three months as to how bad it was, with a little bit of justification. Probably not a lot, but a little bit. But then when a senior officer or somebody said, how's it going? I always said, oh, fantastic, brilliant. Couldn't be better. It was almost like a reaction, like it just did it automatically. Yeah. And there was a bit of fear thrown in there as well, as you say the right thing or else, you know what I mean? Is the next generation, what next? We're doing things this way. Let's just fast forward 20 years. What will be our marketing approach? What will be our hiring approach, what will be our everything approach in 20 years time? Because those need to be adapted. That being adapted today, so you're ahead of the pack and not behind the pack. And finally, I would start using AI loosely, initially chat, GPT and start probably understanding that, developing senior management. I once played golf with the colonel of the logistics, Italian. I'd left military. My wife was still serving, so still on the fringes. I was playing down the golf course quite a lot. And this one morning, his name was Pierre, playing golf with this colonel. He was very nice, pleasant guy, and he was on about something and I can't remember exactly what points he raised. And I laughed. I don't think he took my laugh in a nice way. And so what are you laughing at? I went, well, everyone's going to say that to you, sir, aren't they? What do you mean? I said, well, whatever you say. People are nodding. No, they're not. Okay. And the friends I was playing golf with, they disappeared, ran off. They were like they just laughed. I'm going to remove myself from a situation where I could get burned here. They were still serving, so they were just having none of it, laughed and just ran off with their trolleys in different directions. And he said, or is that more of a testament as to how bad they were at Golfers because their balls were all over the place? I think it was more fear and self preservation of get me the hell away from Pete because he's not in the army anymore and he's just having a go at the colonel now. So we had a chat and to be fair, he sort of listened to what I had to say. He didn't believe a word. There you go. And he was annoyed a little bit. I think I forgot all about it straight away. Really. Two weeks later, back down the golf course, he came running up to me, PPP, let's go have a coffee. He said, Unbelievable. Unbelievable. What's that? He said, thought long and hard about what he said. So much so that during the week, he started to test it out. What do you mean? He said, Well, I was having these meetings with all the hierarchy within my battalion, and I started talking nonsense and rubbish. He used a bit more colorful language than that. And everyone just kept nodding, all of them. People that I got the utmost respect for, people that knew I was talking crap, were nodding away. He said, I did it three times. Not one person within my whole hierarchy came up to me and said right out of order there big time. No one. Because there you go. I said, It's sort of trained what you don't see, sir, because you're at the top of the tree. People are ingrained to nod often before you've even opened your mouth. The nodding starts regardless what comes out and it goes it's like human nature. It's hierarchy again, utilizing AI but keeping that in mind from a managerial point of view the bots won't license. So the bots are going to be more factual, obviously. Whereas people are going to have their own agendas are probably more than anything else. Yeah. It's almost like to be more successful as an organization. Where are we going? Where should we be going? Who's saying what and why and who's just agreeing with hierarchy? The hierarchy agree with they all agree with anyone anyway. Everyone agrees with the CEO agrees with such and such agrees. It's just one agreement. And then outside the meeting they're all saying like, you don't know what he's talking about. And it's almost like the bots give us now the opportunity to be more it's impartial rather than yeah. Removes the human emotional part. It should be more factual and more impartial with giving information. Everyone knows that. If you went to the boss and say well, I don't agree with anything you've just said. If you're 100% right, the natural reaction of the boss initially is going to be temper. Then it becomes an influence thing. Whereas the HR manager goes to the I have told you I want these type of people, but they're wrong. But they're shouting and screaming and demanding and banging the desk and the poor HR manager is like, right, okay, you're wrong, but you're intimidated me enough to be right. I think this is the problem with the hierarchical hierarchy structure within corporate land where the fear of expression and people who move in the thing, what the difference? Have they have more openness, more friendly, more to wear jeans and T shirts the likes of Facebook, Google and all these new type organizations that are rang by younger people with different ideals, Apple and all this kind of stuff where they want the inclusive culture from the top to the bottom. So people are like, how are you doing? How's your wife? How are you doing? All right? Good. Yeah. And it's like so you all feel part of the family as opposed to this buying in and Bots? I think Bots will allow us to get there because initially they'll take the emotion out of things. Yeah. Kind of help bridge a gap in a way. No point. The bosses can't argue with the boss because who they argue with, you know what I mean? Some of my things on how do companies change internally, chris, to reiterate, would be to take feedback from everyone. But more importantly, those right at the bottom, they mourn the most, but they understand more. Two to sell the company better to get their messages out there. And then the use of bots, which will change which art is changing the world and will continue to change the world. I'll make an admission I prepared for this podcast using the bot. Yeah, you can use Chat GBT to find out a lot of stuff and it helps and it does. It's a good tool to support, but it's not necessarily something that, again, basically summarizing this entire conversation, job descriptions or anything. Everything is a tool within your arsenal, within your kit to use, but it should not be viewed as just that's the one essential tool and you can't do anything without it. That's not the case. My thing of disliking job descriptions is fundamentally incorrect or can be viewed as being incorrect. And I understand that if an adequate job description is used and quality people are employed, it's a process, isn't it? How successful is the process? Well, what's the final result? Absolutely quality people use the job description. Then no one can say, well, it was wrong. How was it wrong? It's only wrong when you either can't hire, struggle to hire, get the wrong people. Yeah. Then you need to look at the process. As a general rule, I'm more always leaning towards the growth of how can we improve something and moving up. Like the CV, the job description, employment contracts, how people themselves are managed and how the managers manage themselves and all this kind of stuff and breaking it all down and trying to make better using online tools, modeling and that kind of thing. Which is a long journey, but it's interesting. Chris, do you want to add a closing statement from your side? To me, the thing that has happened during my business life, which spans longer than I care to have state, is the pace of change is accelerating and if you don't change it's this Darwinian situation, survival of the fittest. And in order to survive and remain one of the fittest, you have to use all the tools available to you. Of which I would say Chat GPT is the most dramatic change since the introduction of the internet and I think it's going to involve massive movements and automation is going to be eased by the use of it. And a lot of the people are going to find their positions squeezed, but that has happened for hundreds of years. Squeezed, but also it's a tool that they can use to improve their performance within their jobs themselves. Absolutely. Also, Chris, you sometimes look at yourself as more the elder statesman in the company and some of the tech you can struggle with, but at least you had the which I didn't. At least you had the forethought to. I'll use Chat for this me for this podcast. Why didn't I think of that? I'm the one working on this stuff. And there's Chris pulling that one out at the end. Sorry. We will make sure we make a note, time, date, stamp, record that so that we all know that he did do something smart with technology once in his life. Yeah. I think it's going to be an ongoing thing and be like, where is this information coming from? Like, anything. If the tool work smart, don't work hard. Hard, yeah. Where that can happen, do it. And where you see this and again, it all comes down to what results do you get, don't you? Because if you're not getting good information and results from it, then you wouldn't use it, would you? No. Right. Does anyone have anything else they want to add? Because if not, I'm going to wrap this episode up. Well, I think Pete and I have a different view on job descriptions. I still think that in depth, quality job descriptions used internally within a company are essential in the road of preparation before they start looking for people. And I think Pete kind of acknowledged that in terms of you do see the value in them, but you also see a lot of value in removing them. So I think it's kind of there's the swings and roundabouts, there's the Catch 22 situation of there's the benefits and the drawbacks for either argument. But at the end of the day, as Pete acknowledged, what results come about? And that's the thing, is that if you found that not using a job description or not using the job description provided by an employer and going with your own interpretation or information, et cetera, so long as it's agreed and you get the results and they've found the person that they wanted, well, then that's perfect. My finishing statement will be that you find out more about systems and structure, right and wrong, from failure. So for example where we have failed to find where we have provided people and they haven't stayed course of time left early or we present unsuitables within the client zone that we can then start looking at where was the areas. And this is the analysis part that obviously I do a lot of where it's the failure that we're struggling with is what identifies the failing areas. Because if you only ever concentrate on the good, you're never going to adapt to change anything. No. Or make progress. Yeah. And the willingness to make hard decisions, not allowing something just to drift on. Well, for all our listeners out there, depending on what platform you are listening on, please, like share, subscribe, follow share this with anyone that you think might be interested. So, from myself, Francesca, it's goodbye. Goodbye, everyone, and retweet reshare, repost, read everything, get the message out there. Thank you. Take care, everyone, and we'll see you on the next episode.