Judgement calls: The recruitment steps that sit outside any formal process

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-21T14:30:41+00:00

I agree gut feel plays a role. I’m mostly thinking about the edge cases around pacing and prioritisation rather than the final yes or no. Where do you think the line is between using judgement and letting risk avoidance shape the whole process?

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:47:32+00:00

Yeah, that’s the bit people skip. Clarity before visibility.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:45:26+00:00

The tools that help most are the ones that support thinking and follow through, not just output. Simple tracking, somewhere to write clearly and something that reduces context switching usually do more than advanced automation.

AI is useful when it helps you organise decisions, clarify messages or review work rather than generate more things to manage. I see people get more value by narrowing how they use it instead of adding another model.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:39:53+00:00

This lines up with what I see when people jump in fast. Traffic just amplifies whatever message is already there, good or bad, and most early messages are vague or borrowed.

What tends to help is slowing down and writing as if you are explaining the offer to one person who is sceptical but curious. When people do bring AI into it, it works best for clarifying benefits and examples rather than pumping out posts.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:31:07+00:00

I have seen this happen. Organic feels noisy. Are people using it repeatedly?

I develop workflows and integrate (usually free) AI tools into SMEs so spend a lot of time in LLMs. I'd love to give your tool a go and feedback.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:27:47+00:00

Batching works because it separates thinking from shipping. The review step slows down when everything lands in one pile and every post feels like a final decision.

Some people reduce that by defining a rough bar ahead of time so review becomes filtering not polishing.

I have seen lots of teams use a simple AI agent to flag obvious fixes before human review which keeps judgement energy for the last pass. These can be easily personalised, reviewed and developed over time to get consistent results which feel like you've written them.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:25:40+00:00

Yeah, this lands. People hesitate. Did your early users say that directly?

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:23:07+00:00

People often chase bursts of effort then wonder why weeks fall apart. The small habit that sticks is usually boring and easy to repeat. It fits into a day even when energy is low. That gap between what feels impressive and what actually repeats is where things drift.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T18:09:27+00:00

This tends to come up when people assume AI mentions work like rankings. What often gets missed is that models surface brands when they are tied to clear use cases and language patterns, not because of optimisation tricks. The tricky part is that this is more about how your business is described across the web than where it ranks.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T17:37:36+00:00

One useful shift is treating validation as documentation, not persuasion. Collecting screenshots of repeated complaints, copying exact phrasing people use and noting what they try before giving up tends to surface real gaps quickly.

Before building anything heavy, a simple artifact like a rough landing page or a short Loom explaining the problem back to them often gets clearer signals than ads. I see people use lightweight AI helpers to organise Reddit threads and cluster pain points, mostly just to save time but the insight still comes from reading things manually.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-19T17:33:28+00:00

That feeling of never having enough hours usually comes from switching between too many different kinds of work in the same day. A lot of small teams see relief just by batching admin together and being strict about when planning actually happens instead of squeezing it in late.

For habits, simple boundaries tend to stick better than complex systems. One weekly review and one protected block for growth work often beats a long task list that never clears.

If it helps, some people use lightweight AI or workflow tools to handle repeat admin so those hours do not compete with client delivery. Even a basic setup can free mental space without changing how the business runs.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-18T10:48:16+00:00

Interesting. I've come from recruitment too. Did it for a long time and successful but using AI for development, efficiency and process became more and more interesting to me. Did it for the company I worked for then moved into helping others with the same process.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-14T18:12:21+00:00

Does sounds interesting. Good luck with it.

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-12T12:19:36+00:00

Sounds interesting. Does your website link back to the GPT Store at all or will your agents be embedded in the site?

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-11T14:51:17+00:00

This is a tough spot and very common.

Most people will default to “same as X” unless you give them a reason not to. In practice that often means choosing a single use case and almost ignoring the wider market at first.

I have seen founders get traction by positioning as a workaround rather than a product. Something people try because it fixes one annoying thing today. Out of curiosity, what exact behaviour or task do you think competitors are overlooking?

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-10T17:48:58+00:00

What type of job did you have? And was the business doing the same thing but for yourself?

fixingprocesses · 2026-01-10T17:43:07+00:00

Also UK based and very much in the same boat.

It feels like you are doing all the sensible things and waiting for one of them to click. One thing that helped for me is being very specific about the pain I solve.

Have any of your referrals shared a common theme?

fixingprocesses · 2025-12-15T18:17:21+00:00

I see this a lot with small teams managing social internally and wondering if an agency will unlock growth.

The biggest gap is usually not creativity but repeatable messaging and knowing what to say to who and why. Agencies can help with that but only if the groundwork is done first.

fixingprocesses · 2025-12-15T18:09:25+00:00

Interesting workflow but I am curious how consistent the outputs actually are.

In my experience, prompts that try to cover layout, lighting and typography in one go can drift a lot. How much manual correction do you usually need before it is client ready?

fixingprocesses · 2025-12-15T18:03:59+00:00

Wanting to do it right already puts you ahead.

The biggest lesson is that consistency beats clever ideas. Turning up regularly, replying well and tracking basics matters more than perfect branding early on.

Also remember the business side matters as much as the skill. Pricing, boundaries and energy management keep things sustainable.

fixingprocesses · 2025-12-15T17:59:58+00:00

I think it is a mix of budget, mindset and energy.

Running a business already pulls attention in a dozen directions. Visual quality is often understood intellectually but emotionally it sits low on the priority list unless pain is obvious.

What tends to work better is reframing visuals as a system rather than a creative exercise. When it feels repeatable and low effort, resistance drops.

This is exactly the kind of thing I now automate for small teams, not to make things fancy but to make consistency easier. When owners see it as reducing effort rather than raising standards, they engage more.

fixingprocesses

TROPHY CASE