The latest Anthropic job listing is causing a stir in the SEO community. They may as well have called it the Search Gawd position. To be honest, this is a reality across the board.
I’ve penned this kind of job description multiple times and even interviewed for it myself. I’ll admit, I haven’t seen many of these roles actually filled, but I’ll touch more on that shortly.
Titles vary—from Head of SEO to Director of AI Search, and even VP of Search or Agentic Commerce GEO Consultant. Lots of titles, same core responsibilities: manage technical SEO, grasp paid search, direct content, collaborate with engineering, build metrics, prepare for AI discovery, and translate it all into growth.
It’s predictable that people think this sounds like several jobs rolled into one—a single employee carrying the weight of an entire agency. This might be a fair observation, but it misses the critical point.
Businesses have been on the lookout for such talent for years. The rise of generative search is now compelling action.
This Isn’t Just an Anthropic Issue
While browsing job boards today, I noticed:
- Victoria’s Secret: Director, AI & Organic Search (AEO, GEO, SEO), $152K–$216K.
- Publicis / Starcom: VP, SEO (Performance Content).
- Accenture: Agentic Commerce GEO Consultant.
- SailPoint: AEO/GEO Manager.
- AirOps: Senior SEO Manager spanning SGE, Perplexity, ChatGPT, Gemini.
- Responsive: Senior Manager, Web Strategy — SEO, GEO, plus Next.js, React, Vercel, DNS.
- Danaher, Experian Health, Amazon News: variations of SEO + AEO + GEO.
- Anthropic: SEO Lead, $255K–$320K.
Diverse industries, varying salaries, yet they’re all unconsciously seeking the same elusive candidate.
Misalignment Between Titles and Responsibilities
Consider Agency X looking for a “Director, SEO/SEM,” whose job includes no SEO—just paid platforms, vendor management, and leading a team of seven.
Then there’s Consulting firm Y, seeking a “Director, SEO/AIO,” without clarifying what AIO entails. A smaller agency’s “VP/Director, SEO” asks for paid search, social, and pharma marketing as preferred skills.
A research firm is hiring a “Director, SEO & AEO,” which accurately reflects SEO and AEO duties—an unusual alignment worth highlighting.
If the company can’t settle on pre-defining the role, a candidate standing a chance seems improbable. The taxonomy says one thing, the JD another, the recruiter screens for something else, and the manager interviews for yet another role. Meanwhile, the applicant tracking system (ATS) disregards viable candidates.
In Search of the Missing Link
You’re searching for someone who can bridge technical search, content, PR, product, engineering, analytics, performance media, and brand—someone who knows these interactions are more intertwined than they appear on organizational charts.
Search highlights these intersections. Technical issues may seem like content issues, and content problems could stem from product issues. Visibility issues might be about authority, not just optimization. Paid search often uncovers messaging issues quicker than brand research does.
In the era of generative discovery, these connections can’t be ignored. When results provide answers, SEO shifts from being purely traffic-driven.
To sidestep into Yoda-speak to avoid AI jargon: information exists only if the infrastructure supports it. Content helps understanding, brand garners trust, and product transforms discovery into utility—or it doesn’t.
You’re not expecting one individual to tackle every task; rather, you want someone who understands the cohesion of these parts. That candidate exists, but traditional systems make it difficult to find them.
The Résumé Might Surprise You
The candidate you need won’t be evidently showcased by years with an SEO title or specific software lists. It’s about their judgment:
- Identifying crucial technical issues versus distractions.
- recognizing when content struggles require external resolution.
- Knowing when to invest, automate, or pause, and when to advise leadership against certain actions.
This kind of discernment doesn’t easily translate onto a résumé. The right candidate might have navigated through various roles in agencies, publishing, product, consulting, and operations. Their career might not appear streamlined like a specialist’s, yet that very diversity equips them for this role.
Unfortunately, your ATS will likely disqualify them, while your recruiter labels them as “non-linear.” Your hiring panel might note they’ve never held the precise title before. But remember, this role didn’t exist before, and there’s no consensus on its name.
Clearly, this selection process is heading off-course.
The Alsotative Possibility
Some processes may be more about absorbing insights from interviewing candidates than actually filling the position.
Senior candidates often diagnose: detailing function structure, identifying organizational weaknesses, outlining first-90-day plans, recommending tools, and highlighting tasks to abandon. By inviting numerous candidates, companies might inadvertently gather varied organizational strategies and priorities without making any hires.
Perhaps that wasn’t the original intent. But if roles remain unfilled for months, resurface repeatedly, alter their titles and scope, and produce interview-like advisory sessions, candidates are right to question what the company truly seeks: talent acquisition or strategic input?
Addressing the Real Issue
Narrowing the job description won’t eradicate the work needed. Focus on deciding the core requirement. Is it:
- A specialist to execute tasks?
- A leader to assemble a team?
- An executive to integrate search, content, product, brand, and performance?
- A consultant to advise on necessity?
These are distinct roles, and expecting them to merge into one is unrealistic.
A Final Thought
I’d excel at such a role, along with a few others who’d be filtered out for the same reasons.
Concerning the Anthropic opportunity, it isn’t materializing for me.
Five years under a nonexistent title from five years ago? My resume doesn’t show that. It matches the job spec — perfectly tailored for ATS rejection. It’s a straightforward system to manipulate, especially for those seasoned in the field.
The elusive talent is indeed genuine. Generative search only spotlighted the gap. Before your company finds someone to bridge these systems, ensure the capability to recognize, hire, and support them.
The companies that master the art of identifying the right candidate—and not just crafting an ideal job description—will take the lead in the coming decade. Meanwhile, others will continue LinkedIn debates about whether GEO is truly a word.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
