Why Your Job Descriptions Are Filtering Out Your Best Candidates

Job descriptions are the first filter in your hiring process, which means they determine who applies as much as who gets hired. A job description written to describe every possible responsibility a role might ever touch, with a requirements list padded to signal seniority, and language calibrated to match internal HR templates rather than how actual candidates think about their careers, is doing significant damage to your applicant pool before a single resume arrives.

"Job descriptions are not neutral documents. Every requirement you list is a filter. Every piece of jargon you use signals who belongs. The companies that write job descriptions that attract diverse, high-quality applicant pools are not being less rigorous — they are being more honest about what the job actually requires versus what HR templates have accumulated over decades of copy-paste."

— Iris Bohnet, Professor of Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School and Author of What Works: Gender Equality by Design (2022)

Requirements inflation

The most studied phenomenon in job description research: women and underrepresented candidates are significantly more likely to self-screen out of roles when they do not meet every listed requirement. Male candidates apply when they meet 60 percent of requirements; many other candidates do not apply unless they meet 90 to 100 percent. If your requirements list is inflated, listing "nice to have" items as required or listing years of experience as a proxy for capability, you are narrowing your applicant pool systematically.

Audit each requirement: is this actually required for day-one performance in this role, or is it a learning expectation that an otherwise strong candidate could meet within 90 days? Required should mean required. Everything else should be labeled "preferred" or removed.

Years-of-experience proxies

"5+ years of experience in this function" is a proxy for capability that is both imprecise and exclusionary. It excludes candidates who developed the same capability faster, through non-traditional paths, or in adjacent roles. It includes candidates who accumulated five years without developing the capability you actually care about. Replace years-of-experience requirements with capability descriptions. The capability description tells candidates what they will actually be evaluated on.

Inclusive language

Language in job descriptions has measurable effects on application rates by gender, age, and other demographic characteristics. Gendered language shifts the perception of who "fits" the role. Ageist language filters candidates based on age rather than capability. Use a tool like Textio or Gender Decoder on every job description before posting. The changes are usually minor and the impact on applicant pool diversity is measurable over time.

Structured vs unstructured JDs

Structured job descriptions, with clear sections for the role's impact, core responsibilities, required capabilities, and preferred capabilities, are easier to read, easier to interview against, and better predictors of whether the job and candidate are well-matched. Add one section most JDs omit: what does success look like at 90 days? This single addition communicates more about the role than any responsibilities list, gives candidates a realistic preview, and gives the hiring team an automatic interview anchor. Candidates who ask good questions about the 90-day success criteria in their first interview are almost always worth advancing.

📊By the numbers