JOB-SEARCH.md
Every draft — message, application, profile rewrite — argues the same case about you. A job search runs for months across dozens of conversations, and the most common failure is inconsistency: three different explanations of the same career move. This file fixes the case once so every draft argues it the same way.
# Job search — <name>
## What I want next
<Head of Finance or Financial Controller at a 200–1,000 person company, ideally multi-entity, in London or remote-UK.>
## What I have actually done
Outcomes, not duties. What I did, not what my team did.
<- Cut the group close from 12 days to 6 across four entities, over 18 months.
- Built the reporting pack the board still uses. Took over a function with no documentation.
- Hired and kept a team of five through an acquisition.>
## Constraints
- <Notice period: 3 months>
- <Salary floor: £<n>. Below this I cannot move.>
- <Location: London 2 days max, or fully remote>
- <Visa: none required>
- <Will not: relocate, take a pure reporting role with no team>
## The transition I have to explain
<Moving from logistics to SaaS. The honest version: the entity complexity is the same, the revenue recognition is not, and I will need a quarter to learn it. Say that plainly rather than claiming it transfers perfectly — the claim is checkable and the honesty is not.>
## Positioning
<Two sentences that make the move make sense in thirty seconds.>
## Target list
| Tier | Companies | Who to contact |
|---|---|---|
| <Obvious> | <...> | <VP Finance / CFO> |
| <Adjacent> | <...> | <Finance Director> |
| <Stretch> | <...> | <CFO> |
## What I will not say
<- That I left because of my last manager. True, unhelpful, and it makes the listener wonder.
- Anything negative about the previous employer.
- That I am "open to anything". It reads as no direction.>
## Weekly routine
| Activity | Hours | Done looks like |
|---|---|---|
| <Direct outreach> | <4> | <6 messages to named hiring managers> |
| <Applications> | <2> | <3 applications with a message to a human alongside> |
| <Visible activity> | <1> | <3 comments on accounts in the target list> |
| <Profile and material> | <1> | <one improvement> |
## Rules for the assistant
- Never invent an achievement, a number or a responsibility. If a draft would be stronger with one, ask me.
- Never write "passionate about" or "I would love to connect".
- Keep the transition explanation identical across drafts. Consistency is the point of this file.
- If I am aiming at something the evidence does not support, say so once, plainly, and then help me with the version that is supported.- Claude Project knowledge
- ChatGPT Project files
- All of it, honestly — especially the constraints and the gap
Everything in <angle brackets> is example content, not instructions. Replace it. The file ships filled in rather than empty on purpose: an empty template gets abandoned, a filled one gets edited.
The reference behind this file
Five InMail credits a month and 90 days of profile views. Worth a month or two; not worth a year.
Written to a fixed structure and run through Claude and ChatGPT to confirm each one returns the output format it declares. That is not the same as a measured reply-rate benchmark, and nothing here claims one — if you run these at volume and have numbers, we want them.
Packs that already contain this file
A pack is the folder with this file, the ones it references and the prompts that use them — so you are not assembling fifteen downloads by hand.
One file is a start. The folder is the point.
Files reference each other — CLAUDE.md declares the reading order, the prompts expect the files by name. The packs ship them together, already wired up.