Your job description is incomplete

Most job descriptions follow the same template.

They describe the company.

The ideal profile.

The responsibilities.

The salary range.

And they almost never describe the context.

How big is the team the person is joining?

Are the processes and routines well-structured, or still being built?

What are the managers like? How much autonomy does this role actually have?

How does reporting work, and how often?

Will this person have two peers or twelve?

These questions sound like details.

They're not.

Context is probably the single best predictor of whether a candidate not only accepts the offer, but actually succeeds in the role.

Someone who thrives building from scratch will be frustrated in a highly structured environment.

Someone who needs clear routines will get lost in a place where everything is still being invented.

We've seen this play out more times than we'd like.

The candidate was strong.

The process was thorough.

The offer was fair.

And the person still left within six months.

In most of those cases, the problem wasn't the wrong person.

It was a job description that didn't give the candidate — or the company — enough information to figure that out before the hire.

The candidate chose the role based on an incomplete picture.

The company hired someone who wasn't the right fit for that specific context.

This is one of the easiest things to fix, and almost no one does it.

Write the context into the job description.

Actually write it.

Not a euphemism. Not "fast-paced environment." Something real.

If the team is still figuring things out and this person will need to drive their own agenda, say that.

If the environment is demanding and ambiguity is constant, say that too.

The right candidate will appreciate the honesty.

The wrong one will self-select out — which saves everyone time.

When did you last write a job description that actually described that context?