Thirty years ago, it was Excel.
Ten years ago, it was blockchain.
Now it’s AI.
Every few years, a shiny new skill gets added to every job spec, and every time, the same problem follows:
Everyone wants candidates who know how to use it, but most hiring managers don’t understand it themselves.
Earlier this week, I was chatting with my colleague Katie about a new search we’d just been briefed on…
The client wanted someone “with experience using a specific treasury system” and “a professional finance certification” – they’d even named the qualification.
So far, so normal.
But something quickly struck me as odd…
How were they going to assess that when I knew they didn’t have that experience themselves?
And stuff like this isn’t rare.
At a recent conference in Texas, I asked a room full of treasury leaders:
“How many of you have added ‘AI experience’ or ‘automation skills’ to your job descriptions this year?”
Every hand shot up.
Then I said:
“And now keep your hand up if you actually know how to assess that experience.”
Every. Single. Hand. Dropped.
I’ve seen it for years: clients asking for skills they can’t measure or don’t even use themselves.
- They demand “advanced Power BI skills”, but couldn’t explain what it actually does.
- They want “AI familiarity”, but have never implemented any automation internally.
- I’ve even seen some insist on qualifications that no one in their country even has!
It’s like asking for fluency in a language you can’t speak.
But if you can’t assess it, you shouldn’t list it as essential.
Because all that happens is…
You filter out great candidates who don’t tick a negligible box.
You slow down your process, chasing skills you can’t recognise.
And you send a message to the market that you don’t understand your own brief.
A good job description doesn’t describe your dream hire; it describes what success actually looks like.
So before you post that next spec, ask yourself these three questions:
- Can I test for this skill?
- Can I describe what “good” looks like?
- Could I spot it in an interview (without Googling it first)?
If the answer’s no – cut it.
You’ll move faster and hire smarter.
Best regards,
Mike
P.S. What’s the most ridiculous “requirement” you’ve seen on a treasury job spec?
