# Write a Better Search Brief: practice workbook
Talent Engineering Academy | An education initiative by Vitae
Edition 2026.09 | Updated 2026-09-24
Course: https://talentengineering.org/courses/better-search-briefs

Turn business outcomes into defensible requirements, evidence criteria and a search plan that can change with market feedback.

## Your deliverable
An agreed search brief and requirement-to-evidence matrix.

Use fictional information. Keep your completed work in your own secure notes. Exercises and capstone work are self-directed, not independently assessed.

## 1. Role outcomes at six and twelve months

Your notes:



## 2. Essential criteria and job-related justification

Your notes:



## 3. Acceptable evidence and transferable routes

Your notes:



## 4. Reward, location, working arrangements and constraints

Your notes:



## 5. Search hypotheses and excluded assumptions

Your notes:



## 6. Decision owners, assessment stages and change log

Your notes:



## Lesson exercises

### 1. From job description to search plan

Create a brief for a fictional Head of Quality. Include three outcomes, three essential criteria with evidence questions, two preferences and three points to clarify with the client.

Your response:



### 2. Investigate the work behind the vacancy

Rewrite a fictional replacement request as three outcomes with evidence of success.

Your response:


Worked example: A manager requests a senior analyst because the previous employee had that title. Discovery finds the urgent outcome is reliable weekly forecasting and coaching two junior staff. The brief separates analytical delivery from management expectations and confirms the available support.

Self-review guidance: Each outcome should name a result, context and review horizon. Avoid personality labels such as dynamic or rockstar. Identify which responsibilities are essential from day one and which can develop with support.

### 3. Challenge requirements and define acceptable evidence

Create a matrix for four requirements with justification, evidence and an alternative route.

Your response:


Worked example: A brief initially requires ten years in aerospace. Discussion reveals the relevant task is managing traceability and corrective action in a regulated production setting. The search includes adjacent regulated industries and tests the actual capability.

Self-review guidance: A good matrix replaces unsupported proxies with observable capability. It may retain a required licence where genuinely necessary, while allowing equivalent experience for a preference. Each criterion has an assessment method rather than a subjective label.

### 4. Translate the brief into a search hypothesis

Write three search lanes and the evidence that would support or disconfirm each.

Your response:


Worked example: For a quality leader, the first market map includes medical devices, food production and industrial manufacturing because all may provide evidence of regulated process leadership. Research then checks whether the operating context transfers to the actual role.

Self-review guidance: Each lane has a reason tied to role outcomes, a sample to inspect and a review date. A rejected lane records evidence, such as missing production responsibility, rather than a blanket judgement about an industry.

### 5. Agree decision rights and manage brief changes

Create a change log entry and candidate communication plan for a new location requirement.

Your response:


Worked example: After ten conversations, the hiring manager adds frequent travel. The recruiter updates the brief, asks why travel is necessary, confirms the actual pattern and informs affected candidates. Earlier interest is not treated as agreement to the new condition.

Self-review guidance: Record who requested and approved the change, its job-related reason, effective date and affected candidates. Reconfirm interest and assess whether the search needs to reopen. Do not silently discard earlier applicants.

## Portfolio review
Check that your work is internally consistent, distinguishes facts from assumptions, names decision owners and explains its limitations. Revise gaps before using the method in real work.

## Further reading
- [CIPD: Recruitment](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/factsheets/recruitment-factsheet/): Professional context for the recruitment lifecycle.

Original educational scenarios. References provide further reading and do not imply endorsement. Check current official rules and appropriate professional advice for real legal, financial or regulated decisions.