The Job Vacancy Nobody Could Fill Because Nobody Knew Its Purpose

Three months into the search, Michael sent the recruiter a message.

“Let’s find someone strong this time. We cannot keep waiting.”

The recruiter, Sarah, read his message. Then she opened the latest version of the hiring brief.

The file was called “Final_Approved_7.”

Seven versions. Fourteen interviews. Not a single job offer.

The company wanted a head of sales.

At least, that was the job title.

In reality, Michael wanted someone to take over daily supervision. The commercial director wanted a strategist. The production manager wanted someone who would stop promising customers the impossible.

The finance director wanted fewer discounts.

Meanwhile, the sales team hoped the new manager would protect them from everyone above.

There was one vacancy.

There were enough expectations for an entire executive team.

This is a fictional story. It explores what happens when hiring becomes a way to avoid an internal management disagreement.

At First, the Assignment Seemed Simple

During the first meeting, Michael sounded confident.

“We need a proper sales leader. Experienced. Independent. Someone who can come in and get things organized.”

Sarah asked a question.

“What exactly is not working?”

“A little of everything. The team is weak. Forecasts are unreliable. We lose customers. I constantly have to step in.”

It sounded clear enough.

The brief included team management. Sales growth. Pipeline oversight. Key account management.

Then the document went out for approval.

That was when the vacancy started growing.

Every Manager Added Something

The commercial director requested experience entering new regions.

“We cannot stand still.”

The finance director added budgeting.

“This person needs to understand the numbers.”

The production manager insisted on technical knowledge.

“Otherwise, sales will keep promising things we cannot deliver.”

Michael remembered the CRM.

“It would be good if they could sort that out too.”

Then came recruitment, training, negotiations, reporting, and personal sales targets.

Finally, someone added resilience.

Perhaps as a precaution.

Nobody suggested removing anything.

Each requirement looked reasonable on its own.

Together, they described someone who would rebuild the department, sell personally, and coordinate several business functions.

The authority remained unchanged.

Michael would still approve every important decision.

There Were Candidates, but Never the Right One

The first candidate had strong team management experience.

“Not enough personal selling,” said the commercial director.

The second had an excellent record with major accounts.

“Too much of an individual performer,” Michael decided.

The third had implemented a CRM and built sales processes.

“We do not need a theorist,” said the production manager.

The fourth suggested starting with a department assessment.

“They have not even joined, and they already want to change everything.”

The fifth asked which decisions they could make independently.

After the interview, someone wrote:

“Concerns about flexibility.”

Sarah reviewed the feedback.

Every manager was using a different scorecard.

A candidate could impress one interviewer for the same reason another rejected them.

Yet the final conclusion always sounded simple.

“Still not our person.”

The Search Became a Convenient Explanation

Meanwhile, Michael kept reviewing deals in the evenings.

Salespeople requested discount approvals through private messages.

Production learned about urgent delivery promises after customers had already heard them.

At meetings, the same sentence kept appearing.

“Once we find the new manager, we will fix this.”

The future employee became the person everyone was waiting for.

Until that person arrived, nobody had to settle difficult questions.

They did not need to agree on authority.

They did not need to choose priorities.

They did not need to decide what mattered more right now.

Was it expansion into new markets?

Or bringing existing sales operations under control?

They could simply keep searching.

One Question Changed the Conversation

After the fourteenth interview, Sarah asked everyone involved in hiring to attend a meeting.

Michael expected to discuss more candidates.

Instead, Sarah put one question on the screen.

“Imagine this person has worked here for three months. What has changed?”

The commercial director answered first.

“Sales have increased.”

“How?”

“Through new customers.”

The finance director disagreed.

“First, we need to stop giving away so much margin.”

The production manager added another concern.

“And stop promising delivery in two weeks when we need four.”

Michael stayed quiet.

Then he spoke.

“I want to stop reviewing the team’s deals every evening.”

Sarah wrote that down.

For the first time in three months, they were discussing a concrete problem.

Not a personality trait.

Not an impressive career history.

An actual business need.

The Company Did Not Need a Rescuer

They started reviewing recent deals.

Some salespeople could not explain the next step.

Discounts followed different rules.

Forecasts relied heavily on instinct.

Customer promises were not consistently checked with production.

Michael stepped in because deals stalled without him.

Over time, his intervention became the normal way of working.

The team waited for the owner.

The owner complained that the team lacked independence.

The new manager was supposed to break that cycle.

Yet the company had never clearly described the cycle itself.

They Rewrote the Vacancy Around Outcomes

The long wish list became three priorities for the first few months.

1. Make active deals visible. Each deal needed an owner, a next step, and an expected date.

2. Agree on rules for discounts and customer commitments.

3. Transfer daily sales supervision from Michael to the sales manager.

Expansion into new regions could wait.

A complete redesign of sales incentives became a separate discussion.

They stopped looking for one person who could be a star seller, technical expert, and CRM implementation specialist.

Those skills were not useless.

They simply were not equally important for the immediate task.

Job description guidance also emphasizes defining the role’s purpose, duties, reporting relationships, and expected standards. Candidate requirements should relate to that actual work.

The Hardest Discussion Was About Authority

Once the priorities were clearer, Sarah asked another question.

“What will the new manager be allowed to decide without Michael?”

The room went quiet again.

They intended to make someone responsible for results.

However, nobody had promised that person the authority to change how the department worked.

They had to discuss it.

Which decisions belonged to the new manager?

When should Michael become involved?

Who would resolve disagreements between sales and production?

Which information would the manager receive?

And what would happen if Michael continued giving direct instructions to individual salespeople?

That last question was harder than the salary discussion.

However, answering it made the position feel like a real job.

The Interviews Changed Too

Previously, candidates heard a broad question.

“Can you build a successful sales department?”

Almost everyone said yes.

Now the questions became specific.

“Tell us about a business where the owner controlled almost every deal. What did you change?”

“How did you decide when a formal process was necessary?”

“What did you do when sales promised more than production could deliver?”

“Which decision rights did you need to achieve results?”

The managers agreed in advance on what they wanted to assess.

They no longer had to decide whether a candidate seemed like a vaguely impressive person.

They needed to understand whether that person could solve a defined problem under defined conditions.

The Successful Candidate Was Not Perfect

The next candidate did not meet every requirement in the old brief.

He had not opened international offices.

He had not configured a CRM himself.

He did not promise to double revenue within a quarter.

Instead, he explained how he had organized a department where the owner approved almost everything.

He described what worked.

He acknowledged his mistakes.

Then he asked whether Michael was genuinely prepared to hand over some decisions.

This time, nobody treated the question as a weakness.

They discussed it.

A few weeks later, the candidate accepted an offer.

He was not a magician.

But both sides understood why they were starting to work together.

Why Your Job Vacancy Stays Open: Look Beyond the Market

A long hiring process can have several causes.

This story does not explain all of them.

However, before requesting another ten resumes, it is worth reviewing the brief itself.

Look more closely when:

1. Each interviewer describes a different main objective.

2. New mandatory requirements appear after interviews.

3. Reasons for rejecting candidates contradict each other.

4. Nobody can describe success in the first few months.

5. Responsibility is defined, but authority is not.

6. Every requirement has the same priority.

7. Questions about priorities receive one answer: “We need everything.”

These are reasons to pause and reach agreement.

Not reasons to blame one manager.

What a Recruitment Agency Should Clarify First

We suggest starting the search with five questions.

1. Which problem should this person solve?

2. What will change if they succeed?

3. Which tasks matter most during the first few months?

4. What resources and authority will they receive?

5. Who makes the final hiring decision?

Then divide the requirements into clear groups.

What is essential from the first day?

What can the person learn?

What is desirable but not critical?

What belongs to a different role entirely?

This conversation does not replace recruitment.

It gives recruitment a direction.

Sometimes the Vacancy Must Be Resolved Internally First

That does not mean removing the job advertisement.

It means resolving the disagreement about why the role exists.

Until managers agree, candidates are effectively interviewing with several different employers at once.

Each wants something different.

Each can say no.

Nobody can explain what a shared yes would look like.

Michael understood this when he reopened the old hiring brief.

Previously, it had seemed detailed.

Now he saw a list of conversations the company had postponed.

Good recruitment does not start with a promise to find someone who can do everything.

It starts with a clear answer.

What should change because this person joins?

And are you prepared to give them the opportunity to make that change?