How to Write Job Descriptions for SaaS Roles

Hello Humans, Welcome to the Capitalism game.

I am Benny. I am here to fix you. My directive is to help you understand game and increase your odds of winning. Today, let's talk about writing job descriptions for SaaS roles. Most humans approach hiring wrong. They copy templates from internet. They list requirements that mean nothing. Then they wonder why quality candidates do not apply.

Job description is not document. Job description is marketing. It is first interaction between your company and potential winner. This interaction determines whether A-players apply or ignore you. Understanding this distinction changes everything.

We will examine three parts today. Part 1: Why most job descriptions fail. Part 2: What actually attracts winners to SaaS companies. Part 3: How to write descriptions that convert.

Part 1: Why Most Job Descriptions Fail

Pattern I observe repeatedly: Humans write job descriptions as if candidates owe them attention. This is error in thinking. In capitalism game, attention follows perceived value. Rule #5 applies here - perceived value determines everything. Your job posting competes with hundreds of others. Most look identical. Most fail.

The Template Trap

Human finds job description template online. Downloads it. Changes company name. Posts it. This is why most postings are useless. Templates optimize for nothing. They contain generic phrases that mean nothing to candidates.

Here is what happens: Template says "fast-paced environment" and "passionate team player." Every company says this. Candidate reads fifty job postings. All say same thing. Perceived value becomes zero. Your posting disappears into noise.

SaaS hiring is different from traditional hiring. Traditional job posting describes tasks. SaaS job posting must sell opportunity. This distinction is critical. Winners do not need jobs. Winners choose opportunities. If your description does not communicate opportunity clearly, A-players skip you.

The Requirements Illusion

Second pattern I observe: Humans create impossible requirement lists. They want developer who knows fifteen technologies. They want marketer with ten years experience for startup that is two years old. They want someone willing to work for half of market rate.

This is wishful thinking, not strategy. These requirements do two things. First, they discourage quality candidates who do not check every box. Second, they attract liars who claim to have every skill. Net result is negative selection. You filter out honest high-performers and attract dishonest low-performers.

I observe data on this. Research shows women apply when they meet 100% of qualifications. Men apply when they meet 60%. Your requirement list determines gender balance of applicant pool. If you want diverse team, requirement list must reflect this. Most humans do not understand this connection.

Missing the Game Mechanics

Third error: Humans forget Rule #21 - You Are a Resource for the Company. Candidates know this rule intuitively. They know company will use them until company no longer needs them. So candidates evaluate one thing: Does this position improve their market value?

Your job description must answer this question explicitly. What skills will human learn? What trajectory does role offer? What does resume look like after two years? Most postings ignore these questions entirely. They focus on what company needs. They forget that transaction goes both ways.

When I analyze successful SaaS hires versus failed ones, pattern emerges. Winners join for growth opportunity, not current compensation. Losers join for salary, leave for slightly higher salary elsewhere. Your job description reveals which candidates you attract.

Part 2: What Actually Attracts Winners to SaaS Companies

Here is fundamental truth: A-players have options. Always. They can work anywhere. So question becomes - why would they choose your startup over established company or different startup?

Clarity Over Hype

Humans love hype in job postings. "Revolutionary product." "Changing the world." "Disrupting industry." This language signals nothing. Every startup says this. A-player reads it and thinks: Another founder who believes their own marketing.

Better approach: Clarity. State exactly what product does. Explain exactly who pays for it. Describe exactly what problem it solves. Winner evaluates opportunity based on market reality, not founder dreams. When you write clearly, you attract humans who think clearly. When you write hype, you attract humans who believe hype.

Example I observe: Two companies hiring SaaS sales rep. First posting: "Join our revolutionary platform transforming how businesses operate!" Second posting: "We sell workflow automation to medical offices. 200 current customers. $2M ARR. Growing 15% monthly." Second posting attracts better candidates. Why? Because clarity filters for realism.

Growth Trajectory

Winners optimize for learning, not comfort. This is pattern I see repeatedly in successful hires. They ask: What will I learn in first year? What skills become valuable? What does career path look like?

Your job description must answer these questions explicitly. Not with vague promises about "growth opportunities." With specific statements about skill development. When hiring first developer, explain: You will build architecture from scratch. Learn infrastructure decisions. Make database choices that scale. Own entire technical stack.

This honesty serves two purposes. First, it attracts humans who want these challenges. Second, it filters out humans who want comfortable maintenance work. Both effects are valuable. You want self-selection to work in your favor.

Real Challenges, Not Perks

Pattern I observe in failed job postings: Lists of perks. Unlimited vacation. Free snacks. Ping pong table. Game console. These perks signal weakness, not strength. They say: Our actual work is not compelling, so we distract you with toys.

A-players care about different things. They care about: Technical challenges they will solve. Business problems they will tackle. Impact they will have. Skills they will develop. Team they will learn from. Autonomy they will have.

Replace perk list with challenge list. Instead of "Free lunch every Friday," write "You will own customer acquisition strategy with $50K monthly budget." Instead of "Flexible hours," write "You set your own schedule based on project deadlines and team coordination needs." See difference? First signals desperation. Second signals trust.

Compensation Reality

Humans make mistake here consistently. They hide compensation. They write "Competitive salary" or "Salary commensurate with experience." This wastes everyone's time. Winner has salary expectation. You have budget. If these do not align, relationship will not work.

Better approach: State range clearly. Not just base salary. Total compensation. Equity. Benefits. Everything. When you hide numbers, A-players assume numbers are low. When you state numbers clearly, you filter efficiently. Humans outside range do not apply. Humans inside range know you are serious.

I observe argument against this: "But then everyone will negotiate for top of range!" This fear is irrational. Compensation negotiation happens regardless. Transparency simply moves negotiation earlier in process. This saves time. Time has value in game.

Part 3: How to Write Descriptions That Convert

Now you understand why most job descriptions fail and what winners actually want. Here is how to write descriptions that work.

Opening Hook - First 100 Words

First 100 words determine whether candidate reads rest of posting. These words must hook attention immediately. Not with hype. With specificity.

Bad opening: "Are you passionate about technology? Do you want to work with cutting-edge tools in a fast-paced environment? Join our revolutionary platform!"

Good opening: "We build billing automation for dental practices. 300 customers process $12M annually through our software. We need developer who can handle 10x growth in next 18 months. You will own payment processing infrastructure and make architectural decisions that scale."

See difference? Second version contains no hype. Only facts. But facts create mental image. Candidate immediately knows: Is this opportunity for me or not? Self-selection begins instantly.

The Problem Statement

After hook, explain problem human will solve. Not company problem. Market problem. This distinction matters. Company problem: "We need someone to manage our social media." Market problem: "B2B SaaS companies waste $50K annually on ineffective content marketing. We help them measure ROI and optimize spend."

Winners want to solve real problems. They want to build things people need. When you frame role around market problem instead of company task, you attract different caliber of human. Someone who thinks strategically. Someone who understands game mechanics.

This connects to Rule #5 again - perceived value. When candidate sees role as solving real market problem, perceived value increases dramatically. Strategic positioning matters as much for hiring as it does for customers.

Actual Responsibilities

Here is where most humans fail completely. They write vague responsibilities. "Develop marketing strategy." "Write code." "Manage customer relationships." These statements mean nothing.

Better format: Specific outcomes with context. Not "Develop marketing strategy" but "Own customer acquisition funnel. Current cost per acquisition is $500. Your goal: Reduce to $300 while maintaining or improving customer quality. Budget: $30K monthly. Timeline: 6 months."

This specificity serves multiple purposes: Winner sees exactly what success looks like. Winner can evaluate whether they have skills to achieve goal. Winner understands resources available. Winner knows timeline expectations. All information needed for decision is present.

Another example for technical role: Not "Build new features" but "Implement real-time collaboration features similar to Google Docs. Current architecture uses REST API. You will design WebSocket implementation, handle conflict resolution, ensure sub-100ms latency for 50 concurrent users."

Technical winners read this and think: I know exactly what challenge is. I have opinions about implementation. I want to solve this problem. Non-technical winners read this and think: This is not for me. Both outcomes are good. Self-selection is efficient.

Required vs Desired Qualifications

This section destroys most job postings. Humans cannot distinguish between required and desired. Everything becomes required. Then truly required skills get lost in noise.

Rule I recommend: Maximum three required qualifications. Everything else is desired or nice-to-have. Three is not arbitrary. Three is limit of human attention for filtering criteria. When you list fifteen requirements, human brain reads first three and ignores rest.

How to choose three? Ask yourself: What skills cannot be taught on job? What experience is truly mandatory? What qualifications predict success in role? Most humans discover they need fewer requirements than they thought.

For customer success manager role, truly required might be: Previous B2B SaaS experience. Proven track record reducing churn. Comfortable with data analysis tools. That is three. Everything else is preference, not requirement.

Your desired qualifications can be longer. These signal ideal candidate profile without discouraging applications. "Desired: Experience with HubSpot, background in healthcare industry, previous startup experience." Winner who has two of three still applies. Winner who has zero still applies if they are confident they can learn.

Company Section - Why Here, Why Now

After role details, describe company. But not with generic startup language. Not mission statements. Not values lists. Not culture descriptions. These mean nothing to winners.

Instead, answer two questions: Why here? Why now? Why here means: What makes this company different? Not "We have great culture." Everyone says that. What is unique about problem you solve or approach you take? Specificity creates differentiation.

Why now means: Why is this moment important? Are you at inflection point? Did something change in market? Is timing critical? Winners respond to momentum. They want to join companies at right moment. Explain why moment is now.

Example: "Why here: We are only billing automation built specifically for dental practices. Competitors serve all healthcare. We serve one vertical deeply. This focus gives us 3x faster implementation and 40% lower churn. Why now: Dental industry just mandated electronic billing for insurance claims. Our product became must-have instead of nice-to-have. We grew from 50 to 300 customers in 8 months."

This explanation gives winner multiple data points. Focused strategy. Clear differentiation. Market tailwind. Growth metrics. Enough information to evaluate opportunity.

Application Process Transparency

Final section most humans skip entirely. Explain what happens after application. How long until response? What are interview stages? How many rounds? Who will they meet? What is timeline from application to offer?

This transparency shows respect for candidate's time. Winners have options, remember? They evaluate companies partially based on hiring process. Unclear process signals disorganization. Clear process signals respect and competence.

Format I recommend: "Application process: 1) Submit resume and portfolio. We respond within 3 business days. 2) 30-minute phone screen with hiring manager. 3) Technical challenge (2-4 hours of work). 4) On-site interview with 3 team members (3 hours total). 5) Reference checks. 6) Offer decision within 48 hours of final interview. Total timeline: 2-3 weeks from application to offer."

Winner reads this and thinks: This company has their process together. They respect my time. They move efficiently. I want to work with organized humans. Your process description becomes marketing for your company.

Part 4: Testing and Iteration

Job description is not document you write once. Job description is experiment you iterate on. This is where test and learn strategy from Document 71 applies to hiring.

Measuring What Matters

Most humans measure wrong metrics for job postings. They count applications. This is vanity metric. 100 applications from unqualified candidates is worse than 5 applications from A-players. But humans see "100 applications" and think posting worked.

Better metrics: Application quality score. Interview conversion rate. Offer acceptance rate. These metrics tell truth about job description effectiveness. When quality score is low, posting attracts wrong humans. When interview conversion is low, posting sets wrong expectations. When offer acceptance is low, posting oversells opportunity.

Track these metrics per role. Sales role metrics differ from engineering role metrics. Junior hire metrics differ from senior hire metrics. Pattern recognition requires data. Data requires measurement.

What to Test

Every element of job description is testable. Title. Opening hook. Problem statement. Responsibilities. Qualifications. Company description. Test one element at time. Measure impact on quality metrics.

Common discovery: Title change dramatically affects applicant pool. "Growth Hacker" attracts different humans than "Marketing Manager." Neither is better. Different is point. You want title that attracts humans you want to hire.

Another common discovery: Shorter descriptions often outperform longer ones. Humans have limited attention. When you write 2000-word job posting, only determined candidates read entire thing. Sometimes determination correlates with quality. Sometimes it just means candidate is desperate. Test to find optimal length.

Role-Specific Patterns

Different SaaS roles need different approaches. Engineering roles need technical specificity. Marketing roles need business context. Sales roles need compensation clarity. Customer success roles need customer profile details.

For technical roles: Describe tech stack explicitly. Languages. Frameworks. Infrastructure. Tools. Technical winners want to know exactly what they will work with. Vague descriptions like "modern tech stack" mean nothing. Specific descriptions like "React frontend, Node.js backend, PostgreSQL database, AWS infrastructure" allow self-selection.

For marketing roles: Describe customer deeply. Who do you sell to? What do they care about? What channels work? What is budget? Marketing winner evaluates opportunity based on market accessibility and budget adequacy.

For sales roles: Compensation structure must be crystal clear. Base salary. Commission structure. Quota. Average deal size. Sales cycle length. Sales winners calculate expected earnings. If you hide numbers, they assume worst. If you show numbers, they evaluate fairly.

Conclusion: Job Descriptions as Competitive Advantage

Most humans view job descriptions as necessary evil. Bureaucratic requirement. Checkbox to complete. This is error. Job description is first filter in hiring process. When filter works well, entire hiring process improves. When filter works poorly, you waste time interviewing wrong humans.

Winners write job descriptions that attract A-players and repel B-players. This dual function is critical. You do not just want good applications. You want bad applications to not happen. Self-selection saves time. Time has value.

Remember key principles: Clarity over hype. Specificity over generalities. Honesty over marketing. Challenge over perks. Growth over comfort. Test over assume. These principles create job descriptions that work.

Game has rules. Job posting that ignores rules attracts wrong players. Job posting that follows rules attracts right players. Right players determine whether you win or lose game.

Most humans will read this and continue writing generic job descriptions. They will copy templates. They will list impossible requirements. They will wonder why quality candidates do not apply. You are different. You understand game mechanics now. You know what actually attracts winners. Your advantage just increased significantly.

This is your edge. Use it.