What We Actually Did
Five decisions drove the results. None of them were obvious at the time. All of them hold up as principles today.
We Ignored the Job Boards
This was the counterintuitive decision that changed everything. The default recruitment marketing playbook in the UK is: post the job on Indeed, Reed, Totaljobs, maybe run some sponsored listings, wait for applications. The problem: every other recruiter is doing the same thing. You're competing for attention on platforms where your ad looks identical to 200 others.
Instead, we went to where the candidates already were, but where nobody was running recruitment ads: Facebook and Instagram. In the mid-2010s, social media recruitment was still considered unconventional for blue-collar roles. Most agencies assumed warehouse operatives and drivers weren't on social media, or wouldn't respond to job ads there.
That assumption was wrong. These candidates were scrolling Facebook every evening after shifts. They just weren't scrolling Indeed.
We Made the Creative Feel Like Content, Not an Advert
Recruitment ads on social media in that era were terrible. A stock photo of someone in a hard hat. A list of requirements. A "click to apply" button. All signal, no story.
We built creative that looked like the content people were already engaging with. Short, punchy video and image ads that led with the benefit - seasonal pay, flexible shifts, local work - not the requirements. The tone was conversational, not corporate. The visuals were real, not stock.
The principle: If your ad looks like an ad, people scroll past it. If it looks like something a mate might share, they stop.
We Targeted Tight and Retargeted Tighter
Broad targeting wastes budget. We built audiences around location radius (people who lived within commuting distance of the specific depots and warehouses), job title and industry signals (people who'd listed relevant roles or worked in logistics, driving, warehouse), and behavioural signals (people who'd engaged with similar job content or competitor pages).
Then we layered retargeting hard. Anyone who watched 50% of a video ad, clicked through to the landing page, or started an application but didn't finish got a second and third touchpoint within 48 hours.
Most recruitment campaigns run one ad to a broad audience and hope. We ran multiple creatives to tight audiences and followed up with anyone who showed interest. The retargeting spend was roughly 30% of the total budget, and it generated over 40% of the leads.
We Removed Every Barrier From the Application Process
The typical recruitment application form in 2016–2018 asked for: full name, email, phone, address, work history, references, right-to-work documentation, availability, and sometimes a cover letter. That's a 15–20 minute process on a phone screen.
We stripped it to: name, phone number, and location. Three fields. Apply in under 60 seconds.
The recruiter could qualify candidates on the phone. The form's job was to capture intent, not collect data. Every additional field is a drop-off point. We removed all of them except the three the recruiter actually needed to make a call.
The Impact
Application completion rate went from the industry average of around 15–20% to over 60%.
We Optimised in Real-Time, Not Weekly
Most agency campaigns get reviewed weekly. We reviewed performance every few hours for the first 3 days, then daily after that.
We killed underperforming creatives within 24 hours. We shifted budget from broad audiences to the retargeting pools that were converting. We tested 8 creative variations in the first week and scaled the 3 that performed.
By day 4, we knew exactly which creative, audience, and placement combination was driving the cheapest leads. By day 7, we'd reallocated 70% of the budget to that combination. The second week was pure scaling of what was already proven.