Who this is for
You are looking for a job in roughly the field you already work in — not changing careers, just moving. The search has become a volume activity: applications sent, few replies, no way to tell whether the problem is the CV, the targeting, the market, or overreliance on the public queue.
This template treats the search as a set of channels with very different yields, because that is the thing raw application counts conceal.
The branches
What I am actually looking for. Narrow enough to exclude things. Not "a developer role" but the size of company, the kind of work, the constraints that are genuinely non-negotiable, and the ones you have been treating as non-negotiable without checking. A search that excludes nothing produces applications that convince nobody.
Public applications. The visible channel, but not automatically the best use of every hour. Worth doing, worth measuring, and sometimes worth capping. Sub-branches: the ads worth answering, what you tailor per application, and how many you are prepared to send before reassessing this channel.
People who already know I can do things. Former colleagues, managers, clients. This can be a high-yield channel because trust already exists, yet it is easy to avoid because it feels like asking for a favour. Name actual people and compare its results with your other channels.
Warm approaches to places I want. Companies you would like, approached before or without an advertised opening. Requires knowing what you want — hence the dependency on the first branch — and it converts far better than answering ads because you are not in a queue.
What I say about myself. CV, profile, and the two-sentence answer to "what do you do?" One branch, not three, because they are all the same artifact in different formats and they should not disagree. This branch tends to absorb the anxiety that belongs elsewhere: rewriting a CV for a fifth time is what people do instead of the third branch.
Interview capability. Separate from getting interviews, and often the actual constraint once replies start. Sub-branches: the story of why you are leaving, the three examples you will reuse, the questions you struggle with, and one rehearsal with a real person.
Where each application actually got to. Not a feeling — a record. Applied, replied, screened, interviewed, rejected, silent. This is the branch that eventually tells you whether the problem is at the top of the funnel or further down, and without it you will guess wrong.
How to use it
Import it and mark two branches Focus at most — typically "people who already know me" and one other. Job searching expands to fill available anxiety, and the cap is the defence.
The dependencies matter here. Warm approaches depend on knowing what you want. Interview capability only matters once replies exist. Working them in the wrong order is why people polish interview answers for a role they have not been offered.
Real Deadlines exist in this map — closing dates, notice periods — and everything else is an Aim date.
What to add once it is yours
Put real company names, real people, real dates. Track outcomes on the last branch as they happen rather than reconstructing later.
Attach Proof: the sent application, the reply, the interview date, the feedback. A branch cannot be marked Proven without evidence, and in a search that runs for months the record is what lets you diagnose a stall instead of assuming the market is closed.
Signs it is working
- Something is moving in the warm channels, not just the public one
- You know your reply rate as a number
- Your answer to "what are you looking for?" excludes things
- You can point at where in the funnel applications are dying
Signs it is not
- All activity is applications and CV edits
- The people branch has no actual names in it
- You cannot say whether the problem is replies or interviews
- The map has grown but nothing has been sent this fortnight