BLBR1116-MS-B86 co-writer of the writing of the title of a posting which is difficult to read (N-3*) – 542354…
Not so long ago, we began elaborating job posting titles, or at least making them original, in order to ensure more interesting returns on postings. This era seems to have evolved since the tendency now is to make them complicated.
It’s most difficult to decipher for those who will use the job title. This craze calls itself “reference number” and especially affects job postings which appear in company’s career sections. A reference number on a job title is perfectly useless for the candidate. Worse still, it greatly decreases the comprehension of your job title particularly when the afore-mentioned reference appears before the actual title. I’m not even talking about postings which include several references in the same title…in the case where you can kill two birds with one stone! Add to that masculine and feminine gender declension, French and English and you can sometimes find job posting titles longer than the description itself.
Is it necessary to remember that a job offer on the internet, whether it is posted in your career section or on one of the many employment sites, will not be read if the candidates don’t click on it? The title of the job is the only element which links it to the job description. Contrary to newspaper ads, where it is possible to skim through the ads without necessarily seeing the job title; on the Internet, if the candidate doesn’t click on the link they will not see what you have to offer.
Curiously, companies who make their job titles the most complicated by using the reference number throughout, are those who have computerized part of their recruitment process. Are they not on the way to becoming slaves of IT systems which supposedly facilitate recruiting tasks?
It is more and more common to see reference numbers take precedence over the job title itself. A field is generally set up to link a reference to a job in most application management systems. It is probably more practical for the recruiter to have this reference number to look at even if is at the expense of the candidate’s comprehension.
The last tendency is to put the reference number in front of the job title. This method facilitates the recruiter’s task of classifying jobs in the system in alphabetical order. The candidate’s comprehension of the title consequently takes a blow as half the information displayed is of no use to the candidate! It is nonetheless on this basis that candidates will decide whether or not to click on your offer. Will the reference ANT001-MV-B85 featured in the job title contribute to informing candidates on what lies behind it?
A reference number on a job title is no use whatsoever to candidates. The reference only has a purpose during application if they actually choose to do so. Putting something useless in front of the candidate during the fraction of the second when they decide whether to click is a bit risky don’t you think?
The root of the problem comes from the fact that the recruitment team attempts to adapt their own recruitment process for the IT system that the IT department created for them (not always with prior consultation) or that the management decided to drop on them. Shame…The adjustment is much more laborious.