u/JVertsonis

Recruiter here! back again with these because they are fun to do, and I love being able to offer tips!

Here is one of the biggest mistakes I see candidates make in interviews: They try to sell their “best” skills instead of selling their most relevant skills, and honestly, this is one of the biggest things separating average interviewers from candidates who consistently get offers.

A lot of people walk into interviews thinking: “I need to impress them.” So naturally, they start talking about EVERYTHING. Every achievement, certification, technical skill, & responsibility they’ve ever had. However, the problem that comes with this is interviews are not won by showing you can do “a lot”. They are won by showing: You understand what THIS company specifically needs and why YOU solve that problem. That is a completely different style of communication. Because most companies are not hiring based on: who is smarter, or who has the most skills. 

They are hiring based on: Who feels like the safest, clearest solution to our current problems? That is the real game......honestly, this is where communication becomes incredibly important. The best candidates are not always the most experienced candidates. A lot of the time, they are simply the candidates who communicate their relevance better.

They understand how to: identify the company’s core pain points, understand the risks the hiring manager is worried about, and position their background around solving THOSE things specifically.

For example: If a company desperately needs reliability, structure and stakeholder communication, but you spend 15 minutes talking about technical achievements that don’t address those concerns, you may actually lose to a “less impressive” candidate who directly sold trust, communication and consistency.

Because people hire around pain. And interviews are heavily emotional decision-making processes whether people admit it or not. Hiring managers are constantly asking themselves things like:
“Will this person make my life easier?”
“Can I trust this person with clients?”
“Will they integrate well into the team?”
“Do they understand what we ACTUALLY need?” That’s why effective communication matters so much.

The candidates who perform best are usually the ones who can simplify complexity, read the room, stay structured under pressure and connect their experience directly back to the business problem. Not the ones trying to dump every achievement onto the table hoping something sticks. And honestly, once candidates understand this, interviews become WAY easier because you stop trying to “sound impressive” and start focusing on becoming highly relevant. That is the shift that changes everything.

Anyway, hope this helps someone because I genuinely think understanding this changes the way people approach interviews completely! 

If anyone has questions around interviews, recruiter psyc, communication or positioning yourself better in interviews, feel free to ask below or shoot me a DM! Always happy to chat :)

Love coming on here and chatting to people so thought I would talk about situational questions as I see this is something lots of candidates struggle with pitching perfectly, so thought I'd give some tips! As I have been doing a lot of interview prep recently with my own students & candidates, one thing I see candidates do constantly with situational questions is they spend way too much time trying to sell the outcome of the story instead of selling their actual approach.

And I genuinely think this is one of the biggest reasons good candidates underperform interviews.

Most people get asked something like:
“Tell me about a difficult situation.”
“Tell me about a time you handled pressure.”
“Tell me about a conflict at work.” etc

and then they instantly go into a 5-10 minute story explaining every tiny detail about what happened, who said what, the timeline, the ending, the outcome etc. But the problem is, the outcome itself may not even be that impressive to the interviewer. And honestly, that’s not even the main thing they’re assessing anyway.

What interviewers are really trying to figure out is:
How does this person think?
What’s their approach under pressure?
How do they make decisions?
How do they communicate?
Can I trust this person repeatedly in different situations?

Because at the end of the day, companies hire based on reliability and predictability.

They want to know:
“If I put this person into 100 different situations, do I trust their approach enough that they’ll probably figure it out?”

That is the game. Which is why I always tell people:
Sell the philosophy first.
Sell the approach first.
Then tell the story, this will come naturally after. Before you even go into the example, take 30-45 seconds to explain how you generally approach situations like that.

Now instantly the interviewer understands: how you think, how you operate, your communication style, your emotional intelligence & your maturity under pressure

THEN you say:
“So there was this time when....” and now the story actually has context and meaning behind it. That is a completely different interview answer compared to someone just randomly storytelling for 7 minutes. The story should simply be evidence that your approach works.

Because the real thing you are selling is not the specific outcome from one random situation. You are selling the idea that your philosophy and approach can be trusted repeatedly across multiple situations.

That’s what makes candidates come across as senior, structured, calm and reliable instead of reactive or robotic.

And honestly, once people understand this shift, situational interviews become significantly easier because you stop trying to memorise perfect answers and start naturally explaining how you actually think professionally.

Anyway, hope this helps someone because I genuinely think this changes interviews completely once you understand what companies are actually assessing!

If anyone has questions around interviews, recruiter psychology, situational questions or answer structure, feel free to ask below or shoot me a DM! Always happy to chat :)

I really have enjoyed giving tips on here in regards to helping job seekers with their search.

If I lost my own job tomorrow, honestly, I don’t think the first thing I would do is panic.

I think a lot of people make the mistake of treating a job search emotionally instead of strategically. They apply to 200 random jobs, refresh LinkedIn every 10 minutes, and hope something eventually sticks.

But if I lost my job tomorrow, my first priority would actually be clarity. I would sit down and figure out exactly what lane I want to be in.

Not “I’ll take anything.” Not “I’m open to everything.” Specificity matters way more than people realise because once you know the type of role, environment, and direction you actually want, the entire search becomes easier to structure.

From there, I would identify the companies I genuinely want to work for and start understanding how they hire.

Who are the recruiters?
Who are the hiring managers?
What backgrounds are they prioritising?
What problems are these teams trying to solve?
What candidates are they usually saying yes to?

Because one thing I’ve learnt working in recruitment is that opportunities usually come through visibility and positioning, not just applications alone. So yes, I would still apply for jobs every single day. Absolutely.

But I would also be reaching out to recruiters directly. Connecting with hiring managers.
Following up properly, having conversations consistently & building familiarity with people in my market.

And honestly, this is the part most candidates skip. A job search should never be passive.

The candidates who usually get momentum fastest are the ones who stay visible over and over again. Not in an annoying way. Just consistently present. I’d also be tailoring my approach based on what companies actually care about instead of just talking about myself.

Because companies do not hire effort. They hire solutions! If a role values communication, reliability, stakeholder management, attention to detail, leadership, sales ability, technical skills, whatever it is — I would make sure every part of my resume, outreach, interviews, and follow-ups aligned back to those needs. And then honestly? I would repeat that process every single day for 30 days straight without overthinking it. Consistent applications, consistent outreach, consistent follow-ups & consistent conversations.

Because momentum in a job search usually comes from volume + alignment + visibility over time.

Most people quit the process emotionally before the process has even had enough time to work. Anyway, hope this helps someone!

And if anyone has questions about networking, recruiters, interviews, follow-ups, resumes, or job searching in general, feel free to ask below or shoot me a DM :)

I really love giving people tips in this as I feel recruiters don’t do enough to help so here we are! One of the best pieces of job search advice I can give people is this: Follow up.

Honestly, as a recruiter, I think people massively underestimate how powerful proactive communication actually is during a job search. Most candidates apply for a role, hear nothing back, and then just disappear completely. They assume silence automatically means rejection.

But in reality, recruiters and hiring managers are busy, processes move slowly, internal approvals get delayed, inboxes get flooded, and sometimes people genuinely do forget to get back to candidates.

Following up professionally after about a week, especially on a Monday morning when the work week is fresh, already puts you ahead of most people applying for jobs.

And I genuinely mean that.

Very few candidates actually do this consistently, which is surprising because from a recruiter’s perspective, it usually comes across positively. It shows initiative, professionalism, communication skills, and genuine interest in the opportunity. You are showing us that you actually care.

Even if you’ve been rejected, I still think candidates should probe further instead of just accepting generic feedback like “we went with someone else” or “we found a stronger fit.”

Ask questions.

What did the successful candidate have that I didn’t?
What were the biggest priorities for this role?
Was there anything specific that held me back?
What type of background are you ideally looking for?

That information is incredibly valuable because every rejection contains data. The more you understand what companies are actually prioritising, the better you can position yourself moving forward.

And honestly, most recruiters won’t be annoyed by respectful follow-ups. If anything, we appreciate them. It shows maturity and confidence, and sometimes it can even save situations where communication simply fell through the cracks.

A job search should never be passive. The candidates who usually perform best are the ones who stay visible, communicate proactively, and continue building relationships throughout the process.

Anyway, hope this helps someone because I genuinely think more candidates need to hear this.

And if anyone has questions about follow-ups, interviews, recruiter communication, or job searching in general, feel free to ask below or shoot me a DM :)

One thing I have realised recently is I think candidates massively underestimate in interviews is just how much companies value predictability and reliability. Honestly, from a recruiters POV, a huge percentage of hiring decisions are not made because someone was the “smartest” candidate in the room. They’re made because one candidate felt safer to hire.

As a recruiter, I can tell you right now that hiring managers are constantly thinking about risk. They are asking themselves things like: “Can I trust this person with clients?” “Will they be consistent under pressure?” “Are they going to disappear in 6 months?” “Can I rely on them when things get difficult?” “Will they make my life easier or harder?” - That is why so many technically strong candidates still lose opportunities. Because they accidentally present themselves as unpredictable. A lot of people think interviews are about impressing companies. In reality, a lot of the time they are about reducing concern.

For example, candidates will jump around explaining 15 different career ideas, saying they’re open to “anything,” or giving answers that sound unclear and uncertain. Even if they are intelligent, the interviewer starts questioning stability and long-term fit. Meanwhile, another candidate comes in and communicates a very clear direction. They understand why they want THIS role, why it aligns with their strengths, what type of environment gets the best out of them, and how their past behaviour proves consistency. Suddenly they feel far safer to hire.

This is also why behavioural examples matter so much. Companies are not just listening to what you achieved. They are studying patterns. Did you stay committed when things became difficult? Did people trust you with responsibility? Did you communicate proactively? Did you solve problems calmly? Did you consistently perform over time Reliability is honestly one of the most underrated “skills” in the entire job market, I mean it.

One thing I always tell candidates is this: companies do not hire effort, they hire predictability. They want the highest probability outcome possible. They want someone they can confidently picture succeeding inside their environment with minimal risk attached. So before your next interview, stop asking yourself, “How do I sound impressive?”. Start asking yourself: “How do I position myself as someone this company can genuinely trust?”. That in itself is the mindset shift that changes everything.

Anyway, hope this helps someone! Curious if anyone else has noticed this too during interviews or hiring processes? Happy to answer questions below or in DMs as always :)

Been doing a fair few interviews recently, and speaking with my own students for their own interview preps, and one thing I have noticed which is almost universal is I see candidates make the move in interviews to spend the entire conversation talking about themselves instead of talking about the company’s needs. And honestly, I think this is one of the biggest reasons good candidates fail interviews and fall short.

As a recruiter, I can tell you right now that interviewers are usually not sitting there thinking, “Wow, this person has an interesting background.” What they’re really thinking is: “Can this person solve the problems this role has? Can I trust them? Will they communicate well? Will they make my life easier?” That is the game. That is literally all their is to it, and the only shift you will need.

A lot of candidates answer questions by simply explaining responsibilities. “I worked in customer service.” “I managed projects.” “I worked in administration.” Okay, but why does that matter to THIS role? That’s the shift people need to make. Instead of just describing your experience, you need to position your experience in a way that directly aligns with what the company is actually looking for.

For example, instead of saying, “I worked in retail for 3 years,” you could frame it more like: what specific skill translates to the role, how many people you serviced per shift, what was the size of company/team and again reinforcing that you have the specific skills desired by the company in their ideal candidate. Now once this approach is done, suddenly the interviewer understands why your background is relevant. You are connecting the dots for them instead of hoping they do it themselves. This is what I mean when I constantly tell candidates: sell to the need.

Honestly, one of the best things you can do before an interview is study multiple similar job ads and identify the patterns. What skills keep repeating? What problems are these companies trying to solve? What type of person are they actually looking for? Then build your answers around those patterns.

Interviewing becomes a lot easier once you stop treating it like a personality test and start treating it like strategic communication.

Anyway, hope this helps someone! If anyone has interview questions or struggles with behavioural interviews, feel free to ask below or shoot me a DM :) always happy to help & chat!

Hey guys! As a recruiter, I see lots behind the scenes of what works and does not work with job hunting, hence why I enjoy giving out tips to people on this app who ask for it, and one thing I’ve noticed on here, and in general is that a lot of resumes honestly are not “bad” because the candidate lacks experience. They’re bad because the structure is hard to skim, the positioning is unclear, the achievements are hidden & the resume doesn’t “sell to the need”

A lot of candidates list tasks instead of proving value. One thing I’ve started recommending to people is structuring experience sections like this:

“In this role, I was expected to:” (then outline) responsibilities

Then underneath: a “Key achievements” section. highlighting things like: measurable impact, improvements, trust/responsibility & outcomes.

It reads significantly better from a recruiter perspective because recruiters are usually scanning resumes very quickly. I’ve also found that professional summaries are massively underrated. Most resumes jump straight into experience without quickly explaining: who the candidate is, what they specialise in & what type of role they’re targeting. That clarity matters a lot more than people realise.

I got asked so much about this stuff from my own clients, I ended up putting together a recruiter-friendly resume template/framework based on a lot of the common issues I keep seeing repeatedly.

Happy to send it through to people if it would genuinely help. Or additionally, happy to help with any questions :)

Really happy to help give tips/insights on resumes, screening, interviews, networking etc. Whatever your stress is, let me know! I am happy to help and chat. If easier, you guys can DM me too :)

Hey guys! Some of you guys may or may not know me from previous posts, but I really enjoy giving advice on here from a recruiters POV to help you with your job hunting.

I’m curious, as I know typically reddit is made through blog-type posts, but if I was to share 60 second videos of myself giving tips, would anyone even want to see this? Would you take much value from it? Or would you guys prefer just standard forum type posts like normal?

Not selling anything, genuinely just curious as I don’t see it much on this subreddit, but I’d love to explain points like this!

Recruiter here, keen to learn about the specific stumbling blocks job seekers are facing and happy to offer some practical tips. Is it networking, interviews, communication, resume building & tailoring etc. feel free to let me know! I am keen to learn & offer any practical insight from the other side of the recruitment process.

If you don’t feel like sharing your experience here, that’s fine — DMs are always open too :)

Keen to offer insight & tips as to how you can improve your resume to turn attention to opportunities, let me know! If easier — shoot me a dm 😊

I’m a recruiter, specialising in this field and would love to know more about this from people on here! Is there a particular struggle with your search as you’re younger/more junior? Let me know - ask me anything as well. Happy to offer some tips :)

As a recruiter, the number one thing I always tell candidates is to not even stress about pure job applications, but rather focus and prioritise networking & relationship building. Keen to understand here how everyone feels about it, and if they have any questions! Keen to chat & help.

I did one of these a little while ago and really enjoyed talking to everyone and learning of different backgrounds and problems, if you have any specific question - let me know guys! Happy to help and offer insights from a recruitment perspective 😄