qa-aman/job-description

Overview

Based on Hire With Your Head by Lou Adler. Traditional JDs list requirements (skills, years of experience, degrees) but don't tell candidates what they'll actually do. Performance-based JDs flip the model: define what "great" looks like in 90 days and 1 year, then work backward to what's required. This filters for candidates who can deliver outcomes, not just match keywords.

Workflow

Step 1: Define the Performance Objective

Before writing a single word of the posting, answer: "What does this person need to accomplish in the first 90 days to be considered successful?"

Ask [hiring manager]:

• "If you hired someone today and they exceeded your expectations at 90 days, what would they have done?"
• "What's the one outcome that, if missing, would make this hire a failure?"
• "What does the person in this role own, end-to-end?"

Convert answers into 3-5 measurable performance objectives. Format:

- Within 90 days: [specific deliverable or outcome]
- Within 6 months: [milestone or capability reached]
- Within 12 months: [strategic outcome or ownership expanded]

Step 2: Write the Opening Hook

State the mission of the role, not the list of duties. Candidates skim - the opening determines whether they read further.

Bad: "We are looking for a Senior Engineer to join our growing team." Good: "You'll own the data pipeline that powers every dashboard [your company] ships. In the first 90 days, you'll audit what exists, document what's missing, and ship the first version of the new ingestion layer."

Step 3: Structure the Job Description

# [Role Title] - [Your Company]

## The Role
[2-3 sentence mission. What does this person own? What's the impact?]

## What You'll Do (First 12 Months)
- [90-day outcome]
- [6-month outcome]
- [12-month outcome]
- [Ongoing responsibility 1]
- [Ongoing responsibility 2]

## What We're Looking For
[5-7 bullets. Lead with must-haves, end with nice-to-haves.
Each bullet states a capability, not a credential.
"Built and shipped X" beats "5 years of experience."]

## What We Offer
- Compensation: [$X - $Y base + equity/bonus structure]
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
- [Culture or growth differentiator]

## How to Apply
[Clear next step. Link or instruction. No paragraph of boilerplate.]

Step 4: Write the Requirements Section

Requirements should predict performance. For each requirement, ask: "Can someone without this still achieve the 90-day outcome?" If yes, it's a preference, not a requirement.

Format requirements as:

• Must-have: Can demonstrate [specific capability] through past examples
• Strong plus: Experience with [tool or domain] - not required but speeds ramp

Avoid:

• Years of experience minimums ("5+ years") - use capability statements instead
• Degree requirements unless genuinely role-critical
• Vague adjectives ("passionate", "self-starter", "team player")

Step 5: Calibrate on Seniority

Use the scope-ownership matrix to anchor level:

| Level | Scope | Ownership | |-------|-------|-----------| | Junior / IC | Defined tasks within a project | Executes with guidance | | Mid | Full features or workstreams | Owns deliverable, escalates blockers | | Senior | Cross-team outcomes | Owns outcome and unblocks others | | Staff / Lead | Org-level capability | Sets direction, multiplies team |

Make sure the performance objectives match the level. A "Senior" JD with junior-level objectives will attract the wrong pool.

Step 6: Review Before Publishing

• Remove corporate jargon ("synergy", "dynamic", "fast-paced environment")
• Remove requirements that correlate with demographics, not performance
• Cut every bullet that isn't load-bearing - shorter JDs get more qualified applicants
• Add specific signals of the work environment: "We ship weekly", "No dedicated QA team", "You'll be the first in this function"

Anti-Patterns

1. Leading with company bio Bad: "Founded in 2018, [your company] is a mission-driven SaaS company transforming the way teams collaborate..." Good: Lead with the role's mission and impact. Save the company pitch for an "About Us" section at the bottom.

2. Requirements as a wishlist Bad: "5+ years Python, experience with Kafka, Spark, Airflow, dbt, Snowflake, AWS, GCP, and strong communication skills..." Good: 5-7 must-haves that directly predict the ability to hit the 90-day outcome.

3. Duties list masquerading as outcomes Bad: "Responsible for writing code, attending standups, participating in code review, and collaborating with stakeholders." Good: "Own the auth service - design, build, and maintain it. In 90 days, migrate it off the legacy monolith."

4. Vague compensation Bad: "We offer a competitive compensation package." Good: "$140,000 - $170,000 base depending on experience + 0.1-0.25% equity over 4 years."

5. Burying the interesting work Bad: A wall of text where the most compelling work appears in paragraph 4. Good: First 2-3 sentences are the hook. If they're not compelling, the rest won't be read.

Quality Checklist

• [ ] Performance objectives are specific and measurable (not a duties list)
• [ ] Opening 2-3 sentences describe mission and impact, not the company
• [ ] Requirements list is 7 items or fewer, each tied to a performance outcome
• [ ] Compensation range is included
• [ ] No vague adjectives ("passionate", "self-starter", "fast-paced")
• [ ] Seniority level matches the scope and ownership in the objectives
• [ ] JD body is under 600 words (shorter performs better with qualified applicants)
• [ ] Call to action is clear and frictionless