Job search
How to decide whether a job is worth applying to
A practical way to separate real requirements from wish-list language, judge the gaps that matter, and spend your application time where it has a chance.
Do not decide from the job title or from whether you match every bullet. Decide from the work: what the employer needs done, which requirements prove you can do it, and whether your evidence is strong enough to make a credible case.
Start with the outcome, not the wish list
Most postings mix three different things: the result the team needs, the work someone will do to produce it, and a long list of signals the employer hopes will predict success. Those signals are not equally important.
Read the opening paragraph and the first responsibilities before counting keywords. Write one sentence that begins, “They need someone who can…” If you cannot finish that sentence, the posting is too vague to judge yet.
- What must be different six months after this person starts?
- Which two or three responsibilities appear first or repeat?
- Does the role own decisions, execute a process, or support someone who does?
Sort requirements into three piles
A requirement belongs in the first pile when you could not legally or practically do the job without it. A nursing license, security clearance, required language, or work authorization can be a real gate. Put evidence of doing the central work in the second pile. Put preferences, familiar tools, and broad personality language in the third.
The useful question is not “Do I meet 80%?” A percentage treats a license and a preferred project tool as equal. Ask whether you clear the gates and can prove you have done work close enough to the core outcome.
- Gates: credentials, location, schedule, authorization, or genuinely required domain access.
- Core evidence: projects, decisions, customers, systems, or results that resemble the main work.
- Learnable preferences: tools, terminology, or processes a capable person could pick up quickly.
Run the evidence test
For each of the top three responsibilities, point to one fact from your history that supports it. The fact can be paid work, a project, volunteering, coursework, or a portfolio artifact. It does not have to use the employer’s exact vocabulary, but it must be true and specific enough to discuss in an interview.
If you have evidence for two of the three and clear the real gates, the role may be worth a tailored application. If you have no evidence for the central work, changing keywords will not fix the gap.
Use a ten-minute decision, then move
Give the first decision a time limit. Record the gates, the three core responsibilities, your best evidence, and one uncertainty. Then choose: tailor now, research one missing fact, or pass.
Passing is productive when the mismatch is structural. Applying is productive when the case is credible. The expensive middle is spending an hour polishing an application before deciding whether there is a case to make.
- Apply: gates are clear and you can support most of the central work.
- Research: one answer about scope, location, compensation, or eligibility would decide it.
- Pass: a real gate fails or your experience points at a substantially different job.