I took a look at your startup, Lookcraft. As a guy who likes fashion, it looked interesting.
But to be honest, I'm tired of having to register for these types of sites in order to use/try them upon the first encounter.
Most real-life and online retail experiences do not work this way.
If I had to register with Nike.com in order to see its shoes, I'd shop somewhere else; especially so if I had to do it in-store. (And that's an established brand. Though, perhaps I'm in the minority.)
I suggest you just let people see what you're offering first. Afterall, what you want is sales. But because of my initial experience with/reaction to your site, it's unlikely I'll ever buy something from you.
I know you want to track the number of users, have loyal customers, etc. But let me see the thing first. Let me easily buy something first.
Then, ask if I'd like to register.
Don't force me to, especially not before I've had the chance to say "hello" for the first time.
When I see an email registration form before an actual product, the first thing I think of is: I'm going to get a lot of spam.
I'm sure you wouldn't send that type of stuff to me. But many others have (and continue to do so), so I immediately think back button when I see it.
First, thanks for checking out the site. To your point, Lookcraft gives you personalized recommendations based on your style and fit. As a result, it doesn't really make sense for us to not collect registration info up front.
As a more general point, the reason you see this kind of stuff all the time is that it simply converts better. I spent two years working full-time on funnel and conversion optimization and unfortunately things that many people would view as 'user unfriendly' are the things that convert the best. This is not just measuring the next step in the funnel either, you can measure all the way down to purchase (or whatever your unit of conversion is) and this method of user interaction just works better. I may lose you as a customer, but the statistics dictate that I'm going to do much better overall if I do things this way which is why everybody does. (Groupon, Fab, Gilt, etc).
I also didn't like having to give my email just to see what you're selling, but did it anyway. And then found out that you're "full up", but you'll get back to me when there's room. I'm annoyed that that I'll now get email from you and so far you've provided me nothing.
>I may lose you as a customer, but the statistics dictate that I'm going to do much better overall if I do things this way which is why everybody does. (Groupon, Fab, Gilt, etc).
I've bought 1 thing on Groupon, 1 thing on LivingSocial, 0 on Fab, 0 on Gilt, 0 on One Kings Lane, and I initially signed up for all of them.
And yet reading that your site was fashion for men still (at least initially) piqued my interest.
Perhaps you should target a different customer: me -- a minimalist who just wants a good, focused product line that incorporates color (e.g. like J.Crew).
Sometimes my wife sends me a link to a Fab.com item. I am not registered and it asks me to register before I can see that item. I just close the window.
I agree 100% with this sentiment. fab.com, one kings lane, gilt.com etc. I don't know if I want to join your site and/or be a customer until after I've had a chance to see what you have to offer. I did register with one kings lane but haven't found much of anything I would actually buy. Then I got their daily marketing email which I didn't want and became even less likely to be a customer.
I don't understand why increasing the barriers to potential customers is in fashion right now with shopping sites. Anyone can sign up, they aren't exactly exclusive clubs.
We're doing something a bit different here where we actually do need your info to give you a good experience. We're creating a style/fit profile for you and providing a more personalized experience. However, as I mention in a comment above, the reason everybody does this is because it works better, so really you're just a victim of human nature.
If you've got the numbers to show that this sort of thing leads to more active and involved users then I can't really argue against it but you should stop pretending that this is the only way you could possibly give a good first experience. Off the top of my head it seems you could have an awesome first experience by starting with a bare minimum style quiz. I haven't seen what you have so far but odds are you wouldn't need the entire quiz you currently use up front. From that quiz you can present a page with a handful of selections that would fit the user's responses, giving them a rough view of what they can expect. From there you can prompt the user to properly sign up and take the full signup.
I have no idea what the numbers would look like, but it would certainly provide a pleasing no-registration initial experience.
Having put an email address into your landing page, it doesn't appear you've actually launched so I couldn't evaluate how necessary it is on my own of course and will have to take your word for it.
As for the other sites... this process might increase conversions up front but for me at least it causes fatigue. I'm much less likely to register at another site, or deal with any other product that requires registration before I can see any of the products based on my current experience.
I think it's a fine balance between the two. Unless I'm already hooked into reading more, wading through paragraphs of oh-so-stylish writing isn't a pleasant task.
My $0.02 - the trick is to capture the attention with a blurb at the beginning about the grander vision, give a few high-level bullets to orient / qualify further reading, and then go nuts with the wall 'o words.
Seems like Jamie Quint is following the Simon Sinek Why-How-What strategy. Why you should look at this job, how you'll do the job and what you'll get out of it.
I agree that the ideal mix is a combo of the two, highlights at the top and Why-How-What at the bottom
I'm not familiar with that strategy but it sounds about right. I'm not actually claiming that I'm laying out the optimal strategy here, the right mix is probably somewhere in the middle. This is mostly a reaction to the glut of bullet-point list job posts I've seen lately. I think people need to think broader about how to optimize here.
I have a real hard time taking advice seriously from a company that doesn't have a career page on their own website. It feels like taking stock-market advice from somebody that only buys bonds.
You should probably have a "Careers" page on your website, because it doesn't cost anything, but it's not damning not to see one. We have a pretty good "Careers" page; we get very few inbounds from it.
I think the first listing style is much better for the sort of jobs I'd be looking for. Bullet points are great for lists, and I'd want to see a list of technologies I'd be expected to know and how experienced I'd need to be in each of them.
I think the challenge in writing a good job post is finding your voice and putting together a concise (balance of bullet points and conversation) writeup which feels personal. Either approach pointed out here can come off sounding mechanical, dry and just don't read that well.
I also like when some of the marketing jargon is left out and it reads like a plain english description of what your company is trying to do. Don't pitch me with buzz words. Just describe the potential opportunity and the challenges that might appeal to me.
This post makes an extremely effective point but muddies it a bit by conflating it with a stylistic one.
If you're recruiting for nerd jobs, your best bet is probably to speak some nerd-ese. In particular, nerds find the bulleted lists collegial and painless to read; if they're skimming, they find medium-length well-written prose grafs slightly (or significantly) more painful. Remember that these are the same people who will write "tl;dr" comments on message boards.
Having said that, if you're recruiting for nerd jobs, you'd better be selling from the jump. The lede in this blog post is absolutely correct. There's a fierce market out there for strong talent. If your job post is a short blurb about your company and a list of boring requirements, then Jamie is right: that post isn't doing anything for you.
So I think you take a middle ground: write pithy bulleted text, but make the bullets sell. Nerds like "concrete". It helps to know that some technical "requirements" sell a job, and others don't: an "Experience in Java and J2EE environments" bullet is going to hurt you, but a "Comfortable learning to build complex systems in Scala and Postgres" probably picks up points.
But the best advice on this thread I think traces to Jamie: whatever bullets you write, they should sell the job. If you can sell the job, you'll get good candidates, and screening them manually won't be a pain.
Here's how I'd do ours in this hybrid style (we're always hiring, FWIW) --- this isn't how I'd normally write a job ad (I don't want my postings to look like job ads), but just to illustrate:
-------------------------
Matasano is a trusted security advisor to many of the industry's most interesting companies. We do application security: companies pay us to find startling new ways to break their applications. We're looking for someone who could work at any of the best software companies in the world to join a team breaking apps at all the best software companies in the world.
Things to know about us:
* Founded in 2005 and profitable many years running
* Offices in NYC, Chicago, and SFBA
Specific things we're looking for:
* Ability and enthusiasm for coding. Our day-to-day is solving security problems with code.
* Total lack of fear. Our teams switch on a dime from attacking electronic trading markets to reverse engineering compiled code on FPGA-synthesized CPUs. We don't need you to know how to write a Dalvik decompiler or write a fuzzer for the MongoDB wire protocol. We just need you to want to know how.
* Deep interest in appsec. People who are good at breaking apps love breaking apps.
* Fluent with web stacks. From HTTP to Javascript to the rendering quirks of Webkit, and on through Rails and Django, and how their ORMs work. You'd want to to understand low-level web development well enough so that you could figure out a new stack in hours, not days.
* Comfort with C programming. Appreciated but not required. If you don't know C, we'll want to teach it to you.
Benefits:
* Working in an office culture with a team of people who write debuggers for fun and leaving the office every day in time to have dinner with your family.
* High probability that you'll learn more in this role than any role you've had prior. This year we've written clients for trading protocols, implemented exploit code for cryptanalytic attacks, exploited browser memory corruption bugs, stuffed Riak clusters full of HTTP requests, built a large scale fuzzing farm for Windows desktop software, language runtimes, linkers, kernel modules, iPhone apps, and chipset fuzzers.
* Unlimited free books. You get an Amazon account. You see a book, you buy the book, it's yours. Write your name on it, take it home.
* Market comp, bonuses for speaking at conferences, medical, dental, 401k
Interested? We wrote down everything we could think of about our hiring process at http://www.matasano.com/careers. Our contact information is there. YOU CANNOT WASTE OUR TIME. We're happy just to talk to you about our field.
-------------------------
Notes:
* This is way longer than I'd write a job post, but in the same word count ballpark as the "bulleted list" example from Jamie's post. (I also wrote it extemporaneously so give me a break on grammar and clarity).
* There are bullets but none of them are intended to screen candidates. It's my job to screen, the bullet's job is to invite.
* There are buzzwords but, like I think every good tech job post, the script is flipped: I'm selling with them, not using them to exclude people with a regex on their resume.
* "You cannot waste our time". #1 thing that freaks me out about our job ads: are people reading them and thinking "These guys won't think I'm qualified for the role so why bother applying". Some of our best hires had no previous professional track record in our field.
* Tech-forward: we're recruiting gifted low-level developers, so we're not talking about changing the world or revolutionizing our industry or the exhilaration of working in a fast-paced startup environment. We're talking (I hope!) about awesome technical challenges.
* Yes, I am totally cheating by sneaking a job ad into an HN comment. On the other hand: HN is one of our top recruiting vectors, and we're bigger than most YC companies, so I think I might have some actionable intel on how to recruit from HN. :)
Agree with you 100% here, I was not trying to make a point about bullet points (no pun intended) but rather what they usually represent which is generally a boring laundry list of requirements and responsibilities.
That's a strategy that does pretty well with the kinds of people who will apply to jobs randomly, hoping that one of them will sell them in the first interview.
I took a look at your startup, Lookcraft. As a guy who likes fashion, it looked interesting.
But to be honest, I'm tired of having to register for these types of sites in order to use/try them upon the first encounter.
Most real-life and online retail experiences do not work this way.
If I had to register with Nike.com in order to see its shoes, I'd shop somewhere else; especially so if I had to do it in-store. (And that's an established brand. Though, perhaps I'm in the minority.)
I suggest you just let people see what you're offering first. Afterall, what you want is sales. But because of my initial experience with/reaction to your site, it's unlikely I'll ever buy something from you.
I know you want to track the number of users, have loyal customers, etc. But let me see the thing first. Let me easily buy something first.
Then, ask if I'd like to register.
Don't force me to, especially not before I've had the chance to say "hello" for the first time.
When I see an email registration form before an actual product, the first thing I think of is: I'm going to get a lot of spam.
I'm sure you wouldn't send that type of stuff to me. But many others have (and continue to do so), so I immediately think back button when I see it.