LEADERSHIP

Here is How to Think

The dimensions of research

Most candidates research one or two things. They look at job postings for the role they want. They check the industry in general terms. Then they start applying.

The disciplined candidate researches across every dimension that matters before assuming anything about what is out there. Role. Industry. Company. Country. Level. Language. Channel. Method of reaching. Requirements. Feasibility. Each of these is a separate dimension. Each can confirm the decision made in the previous chapter, or it can contradict it. Both outcomes are useful. Confirmation lets you proceed with confidence. Contradiction sends you back to the decision level, where the decision is revised, refined, or accepted with new context that requires additional action.

The highest possible standard is to research across all dimensions until you understand the landscape, not just the surface of it. A candidate who has researched well knows what roles exist, where they exist, what they require, how to reach them, and how plausible it is that they will land one. A candidate who has researched poorly knows only what the most visible channels show, which is the same view every other candidate has.

This matters because recruiting is in a state most candidates do not fully appreciate. The standard funnel of job posting, CV screen, recruiter call, interview, is increasingly unable to identify the right candidate. Filters miss good people. Interviews favour the well-practiced over the well-suited. Roles get filled by who reached the decision-maker, not always by who would do the role best. The candidate who only uses the standard funnel is competing in a system that is not reliably matching the right person to the right role. The candidate who researches all dimensions, including the channels and methods that the standard funnel ignores, can reach the decision-maker directly. That is where research becomes power.

Key Takeaway: Research is multi-dimensional. The candidate who researches across all dimensions before assuming anything about what is out there sees the landscape as it actually is. The candidate who researches only the surface sees what everyone else sees.

Without research you assume. With research you know. The difference shows up in every step that follows.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: The dimensions of research

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

What you are looking for

Before you can find a role, you have to know what you are looking for across every dimension that defines it.

The role itself is the obvious dimension. The title, the responsibilities, the seniority. Most candidates research this dimension. What they often miss is that the same role title means very different things in different organisations. Head of Operations in a startup is not Head of Operations in a corporation. Senior Designer at one company is mid-level work at another. The role dimension only becomes clear when you research what the title actually carries inside specific organisations.

The industry is the next dimension. The same role in a different industry is a different role. The pace, the standards, the language, the pressures, all change with the industry. The candidate who is open to any industry has not yet finished researching. The candidate who has researched industry knows which one fits the work they want to do, the pace they want to operate at, and the kind of problems they want to solve.

The company is its own dimension. Size, age, ownership, culture, stage of growth, financial health. A small fast-growing company offers a different role than a large established one, even if the job title is identical. The research here means reading what the company says about itself, what former employees say, what customers say, and what the press says. Triangulating between these sources reveals the company as it actually is rather than as it presents itself.

The country and the working language are dimensions most candidates only research at the surface. Where the role is located, what language it is conducted in, what legal status it requires, what the local work culture is. A role in one country that looks identical to a role in another may operate completely differently. Hours, hierarchy, communication norms, decision-making. The candidate who plans to work internationally must research the country as carefully as the role.

The level matters. Senior, mid, entry. Within a senior level, there are gradations. Head of, Director of, VP of. The research must reveal what the level actually means in the organisation, not just the title on the posting. Some companies inflate titles. Some compress them. The level is real only relative to the organisation.

The highest possible standard is to research every dimension until you can describe the role you are looking for in full. Role, industry, company type, country, language, level. Not as preferences but as a specific picture. If you cannot draw that picture in detail, your research is not complete.

Key Takeaway: A role is not one thing. It is the intersection of role, industry, company, country, language, and level. The candidate who researches each dimension separately understands what they are actually looking for. The candidate who researches only the role title is looking at a shadow.

The role you want exists at a specific intersection. Research finds the intersection.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: What you are looking for

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

Where you look

The channel determines what you find. If you only look in one channel, you only see what that channel surfaces.

The most visible channels are job boards and professional networking platforms. Most candidates start there and most candidates end there. The roles posted on these channels are real but they are also the roles every other candidate sees. The competition is high, the filters are aggressive, and the path from posting to hired is long. Using these channels is not wrong. Using only these channels means competing on the same terrain as everyone else.

Beyond the most visible channels there are several others, each of which surfaces roles that the most visible channels do not.

Company websites direct. Many companies post roles on their own careers pages that never appear on job boards. The candidate who has a list of target companies and checks each company's careers page regularly sees roles that the wider market does not.

Industry-specific recruiters. Some industries have specialist recruiters who place candidates into roles before those roles are publicly posted. The candidate who builds a relationship with the right specialist recruiter is in the room before the public funnel opens.

Industry publications and trade press. Companies announce expansions, new departments, new leadership, new funding, in industry publications. Each announcement is a signal that hiring is likely or imminent. The candidate who reads the industry publications knows where the hiring is happening before the postings appear.

Events, conferences, meetups. Hiring happens at events. Companies attend to find people. People attend to find companies. The candidate who is present in person is visible in a way that no online channel replicates.

Alumni networks, university networks, professional associations. People help people they have a connection with. The candidate who has activated these networks has access to roles that move through introductions rather than through postings.

Personal network, via via. The people you know, know people you do not. A request through your network, asking for introductions to companies in your target space, will surface conversations that no job board lists. This is the channel that decision-makers actually trust because it carries the signal of a known person vouching for an unknown one.

Old-school channels. Walking into companies. Calling them. Writing to them on paper. Putting your own advertisement out, saying who you are and what you are looking for. These channels are not used by most candidates because most candidates assume they no longer work. They still work. They work precisely because most candidates have abandoned them. A candidate who walks into a company directly will often be told to make an appointment, but sometimes will be remembered, and sometimes will be seen.

The highest possible standard is to use every channel that fits the role you are pursuing. Not all of them all the time. The ones that are likely to surface the role you want. The candidate who has mapped the channels and is using the right combination sees the landscape from multiple angles at once. The candidate who is using only one channel is seeing only what that channel shows.

Key Takeaway: The channel determines what you find. Multiple channels reveal the landscape from multiple angles. Old-school channels still work because most candidates have abandoned them. The candidate who uses the full range of channels sees roles that the single-channel candidate never knows existed.

The roles you cannot find in the obvious channels are still being filled. Find the channels that surface them.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: Where you look

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

How you reach

The channel is where the role lives. The method is how you make contact with it. Different methods reach different people in different ways, and the method shapes what they think of you before they have met you.

Cold application through a portal is the most common method. Submit the CV, answer the form questions, wait. The submission joins hundreds of others. A filter reads it before a human does. The CV that does not contain the right keywords is rejected before anyone reviews it. This method is necessary for many roles but it is rarely sufficient on its own.

Direct email to a hiring manager or a relevant senior person inside the company is a different method. The candidate who finds the actual person who would hire them, writes to them directly, and shows in two paragraphs why they are worth a conversation, has reached past the filter. Not every direct email is answered. Many are. The ones that are answered are answered by humans, not algorithms.

Direct message on a professional networking platform is similar in principle. The hiring manager is reachable. The candidate who reaches respectfully, with substance, gets seen.

Phone call. A direct phone call to a company is now rare. That is exactly why it works when it works. A candidate who calls, who has done the research and knows who to ask for, who has something specific to say, lands differently than the same candidate submitting a form.

Walking in. Showing up in person at a company is the most direct method available. Most receptions will tell you to make an appointment. Some will not. Some will. The candidate who walks in respectfully, with clarity about what they want, sometimes ends up in a conversation that no application would have produced.

Self-broadcast. Putting out your own advertisement of who you are and what you are looking for. This inverts the standard candidate posture. Most candidates wait for jobs and respond. The candidate who broadcasts themselves attracts companies that match what they are. The advertisement can be a newspaper notice, an online post, a personal site, a regular publication of thinking, a conference talk. Whatever the form, the principle is the same. You stop waiting to be found and start being findable.

Introduction through a network connection. The strongest method. A trusted person inside or near the company introduces you. The introduction carries credibility that no CV submission can carry. The hiring manager who reads a CV that came through a portal asks "who is this." The hiring manager who reads a CV that came with an introduction from a trusted person asks "when can we talk."

The highest possible standard is to match the method to the role and the channel. A senior role at a small company is rarely best reached through a portal. A specialist role is rarely best reached through a cold call. The candidate who has researched the company and the role knows which method is likely to land. The candidate who uses the same method for every role is using a hammer where a different tool is needed.

Key Takeaway: The method of reaching matters as much as the channel. Different methods reach different people and shape how they see you before you have met. The candidate who matches the method to the role bypasses filters that the same candidate using a portal would never get past.

The form arrives in a queue. The introduction arrives at a desk. Choose your method.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: How you reach

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

Reading the requirements honestly

Every role comes with a list of requirements. The candidate who reads them well saves time and applies in the right places. The candidate who reads them badly either disqualifies themselves too easily or applies where they should not.

There are four kinds of requirement on most job descriptions. The essential. The preferred. The wishlist. The filter language.

Essential requirements are real. They are the structural minimums that the role cannot be done without. A licence, a language, a clearance, a specific qualification. If you do not have them, you do not get hired no matter how well you present. These you respect.

Preferred requirements are the company describing what they would like to have but can live without. The candidate who has the preferred items has a stronger application. The candidate who does not is still credible if the rest of the application is strong. These are guidelines, not gates.

Wishlist requirements are the company aspirationally listing what an ideal candidate would have. Most ideal candidates do not exist. The wishlist is what the role would have if the company could write any person they want into existence. These are not deal-breakers. They almost never are. Companies still hire the candidate who is missing several wishlist items if the candidate is otherwise the right fit.

Filter language is the requirements added by HR or by templates that do not reflect what the role actually needs. Generic phrases about leadership qualities, communication skills, team players. They sound essential but they are decorative. Every job description has them. The candidate who treats them as gates filters themselves out of roles they could do.

The disciplined candidate reads the requirements and identifies which category each item falls into. The essentials are checked honestly. The preferred and wishlist items are noted but not treated as gates. The filter language is recognised for what it is. From this honest read, the candidate decides whether the role is reachable.

The dishonest read goes two ways. The first is over-disqualification. The candidate reads every requirement as essential and decides they are not qualified for roles they would actually be good at. The second is under-qualification. The candidate ignores the requirements entirely and applies to roles where they genuinely do not meet the essentials, wasting their time and the company's. Both are honest mistakes. Both come from not reading requirements with the discipline they deserve.

The highest possible standard is to read the requirements with the same honesty you bring to your own assessment. What is essential is essential. What is wishlist is wishlist. What is filter language is filter language. The candidate who reads this way applies in the right places, prepares for the actual requirements, and saves the energy that would otherwise be spent on roles that were never going to work.

Key Takeaway: Requirements come in four kinds. Essential, preferred, wishlist, filter language. The candidate who reads honestly knows which is which. Over-disqualification and under-qualification are both symptoms of dishonest reading. The honest read points you to the roles that are actually reachable.

Read the requirements as they are. Not as you fear them. Not as you hope them.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: Reading the requirements honestly

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

The feasibility test

After the research is done, one question remains. How plausible is it that you land this role.

This is not a question of optimism or pessimism. It is the honest assessment of what the research has shown you. The role exists. You know where it lives, how to reach it, what it requires, who you would be competing against. From all of that, you can answer the feasibility question with reasonable accuracy.

Feasibility falls into three honest ranges.

High feasibility. The role exists in your target space. You meet the essential requirements clearly. You have a path to the decision-maker. Your background matches what the role needs. You can articulate why you are the right person. Proceed with confidence. Most of your effort should now go into preparing and planning the approach.

Medium feasibility. The role exists. You meet most essentials but not all. The path to the decision-maker exists but is indirect. You are credible but not obviously the strongest candidate. Proceed but build redundancy. Have other targets running in parallel. Do not stake everything on a single role at medium feasibility.

Low feasibility. The role exists but the gap is real. Either you do not meet essentials that cannot be worked around, or the path to the decision-maker is not available, or the competition is structurally stronger than you. Low feasibility is where the research sends you back to the decision level.

Going back to the decision level does not mean the original decision was wrong. It means the research has produced information that the decision did not have. With that new information, three responses are honest.

Revise the decision. The role you decided on is not actually the role you want once the research showed you what it really is. Or the role exists but in a form so different from what you imagined that a different role would serve you better. The decision changes.

Refine the decision. The role is still right but the conditions need to shift. A different industry, a different country, a different company size. The core decision holds, the specifics adjust.

Accept the decision with new action required. The role is still what you want, the path is real, but you need to acquire something you do not yet have. Additional schooling. Additional experience. Additional time at a different level first. The decision holds, but it requires preparation that the original timeline did not account for. This is not failure of the decision. It is the research correctly identifying what the decision will cost.

The highest possible standard is to run the feasibility test honestly, regardless of which range it lands in. Optimistic feasibility wastes years on roles that were never reachable. Pessimistic feasibility lets you talk yourself out of roles that were yours for the taking. Honest feasibility tells you where to invest your effort and where to reassess.

Key Takeaway: Feasibility is the honest assessment that ends the research phase. High, medium, low. Each calls for a different response. Low feasibility sends you back to the decision level, where the decision is revised, refined, or accepted with new action required. Going back is not failure. It is the system working.

Research that confirms the decision lets you move forward. Research that contradicts it sends you back. Both are wins.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Section: The feasibility test

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

A real example

The candidate who would later become a designer found his first design role through a method most candidates would not consider. He placed his own advertisement in a newspaper. The advertisement said who he was, what he could do, and that he was looking for design work. Companies responded. From the responses he chose the one that fit. He was hired into his first design role through an advertisement he placed himself.

This inverted the standard candidate posture entirely. Most candidates read advertisements and respond to them. He wrote one. The companies that responded were companies that had not yet decided to hire but recognised, when they saw what he was offering, that he was someone they wanted. The advertisement created the opening rather than answering one. He was not competing against other candidates because there were no other candidates. He had created a market of one.

His second design role came through a different method, equally outside the standard funnel. He walked into companies and asked. Not all of them welcomed him. Most asked him to make an appointment. Some did not. But enough did that he found the next role this way. Walking in, asking, leaving samples of his work, being remembered. The companies that hired him through this method had not advertised the role. They were not looking. He was the reason the role existed.

Both methods worked because both were channels and methods that most candidates had abandoned. The newspaper advertisement worked because most candidates were responding to advertisements, not placing them. Walking in worked because most candidates were submitting forms, not appearing in person. The candidate who used the less-travelled channels was visible in a way that the candidates using the standard channels were not.

The principle holds today even though the channels have changed. The newspaper advertisement has equivalents in personal websites, regular publications of thinking, self-broadcast on platforms where most candidates are passive consumers. Walking in still works because reception staff still tell you to make an appointment and sometimes do not. The specific channels evolve. The principle that less-travelled channels surface more opportunity than over-travelled ones does not.

Recruiting is in a state right now where the standard channels are increasingly unable to match the right person to the right role. Filters reject good candidates. Interviews favour the well-practiced over the well-suited. The candidate who only uses standard channels is competing in a system that is not reliably hiring the best person. The candidate who uses the channels and methods that bypass the standard funnel reaches the decision-maker directly, where the conversation can be about who is actually right for the role rather than who is best at navigating the funnel.

The channels and methods that others have abandoned are still open. Walk in. Broadcast yourself. Reach directly.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · A real example

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

Research

Research is multi-dimensional. Role, industry, company, country, language, level. Where you look, how you reach, what is required, how plausible the role is. Each dimension is a separate piece of research and each can confirm or contradict the decision.

The candidate who researches every dimension before assuming anything about what is out there sees the landscape as it actually is. The candidate who researches only the obvious dimensions sees what every other candidate sees. The first has access to roles and routes that the second never knows existed.

Use every channel that fits the role. The most visible channels are necessary but rarely sufficient. The less-travelled channels still work and often work better, because most candidates have abandoned them. Walking in, calling directly, broadcasting yourself, reaching through introductions. Each channel surfaces different roles and reaches different people.

Match the method to the channel and the role. The form arrives in a queue. The introduction arrives at a desk. The right method is the one that gets you in front of the decision-maker rather than the filter.

Read the requirements honestly. Essential, preferred, wishlist, filter language. The honest read points you to the roles that are actually reachable and away from the ones that are not.

Run the feasibility test before you commit. High feasibility means proceed. Medium feasibility means proceed with redundancy. Low feasibility sends you back to the decision level, where the decision is revised, refined, or accepted with new action required. Going back is not failure. It is the research producing information the decision did not have.

Research is the only phase where contact with reality is the point. Every other phase builds on what the research revealed. A candidate who skips this phase, or does it superficially, will spend the rest of the journey building on assumptions that the world has not validated. A candidate who does this phase well will spend the rest of the journey building on truth.

The disciplined candidate researches across all dimensions, uses the channels and methods others have abandoned, reads requirements honestly, runs the feasibility test, and acts on what it tells them. That candidate is no longer guessing. They know what is out there. They know how to reach it. They know whether they can land it. From that knowledge, every subsequent phase is built on solid ground.

Research is the only phase where contact with reality is the point. Every other phase builds on what you found here.

MarvinPro · LEADERSHIP · Here is How to Think · Vol 0: The Candidate · Philosophy 2: Research · Chapter Outcome

MarvinPro | June 2026

marvinpro.com

Think Simple.