Executive Search 101 - Part 4: Inside the Search: Briefing Chaos, Biased Shortlists, and Offer Hurdles
We've discussed the hidden market, the key players, and the different types of search firms. But once a company formally engages a headhunter for a senior finance role, what really happens? Far from a smooth, linear progression, the executive search process is often a complex journey with potential turbulence at every stage – dynamics rarely visible to the candidates involved.
Let's pull back the curtain:
1. The Treacherous Brief: Getting the Foundations Wrong
Everything flows from the initial client briefing, yet this foundational stage is surprisingly prone to issues that can derail a search before it truly begins:
Misaligned Stakeholders: The CEO envisions one profile, the hiring manager another, and the Board has different priorities. Achieving genuine consensus on the critical requirements and cultural fit can be a significant early challenge.
Lack of Access: Sometimes the search consultant deals primarily with HR or procurement, with limited direct access to the ultimate decision-maker (e.g., the Group CFO). This filtering can lead to crucial nuances being lost in translation.
Shifting Sands: Business needs evolve. A strategy might pivot mid-search, or, more commonly, seeing the first batch of real candidate profiles crystallises the hiring manager's thinking in a new direction, necessitating a potentially disruptive course correction.
The Generic Job Description Trap: Too often, the process starts with a pre-written job description focusing on responsibilities and desired attributes, rather than a deep dive into the actual business challenges, the commercial context, the team dynamics, and the specific outcomes the new hire must deliver.
A skilled search partner anticipates these pitfalls. They'll push for meetings with all key stakeholders, clarify decision-making processes upfront, and perhaps present 'concept candidates' early to test assumptions. However, a poorly defined brief remains a common root cause of delayed or failed searches.
2. Candidate Identification: The Ideal vs. The Reality
With a brief in hand, the search team starts identifying potential candidates. The textbook approach involves:
Bespoke Strategy: Defining target company lists based on industry, scale, structure, and specific challenges.
Meticulous Mapping: Systematically identifying relevant individuals within those target organisations.
Intelligent Sourcing: Leveraging trusted market contacts for recommendations and insights.
The reality, under intense time pressure? Shortcuts are tempting and frequently taken. Lifting candidate lists from previous, similar searches or relying heavily on keyword filters within internal databases or LinkedIn is common. Furthermore, the drive for efficiency has led some larger firms to outsource initial research and name generation to lower-cost offshore centres, while AI-powered tools are increasingly being trialled to automate list compilation from various data sources – prioritising speed, though sometimes sacrificing bespoke insight.
3. Shortlisting: Walking the Bias Tightrope
From a longlist of potential candidates, the consultant typically presents a shortlist of around 3-6 individuals to the client. This is a critical juncture where unconscious bias can creep in:
Mitigation Efforts: Reputable firms employ techniques to combat this. Asking stakeholders to score candidates individually against an agreed rubric before group discussion aims to reduce conformity bias. Anonymising details like names, universities, or even gender on initial written profiles tries to tackle demographic bias.
The Challenge Remains: As I've observed, these efforts aren't foolproof. Bias can subtly shift – perhaps favouring candidates from perceived 'blue-chip' companies or those demonstrating rapid, linear career progression, potentially overlooking individuals with diverse or non-traditional backgrounds who might be equally capable. In uncertain situations, the 'safer', more conventional 'cookie-cutter' shortlist can feel like the path of least resistance for both consultant and client.
4. Assessment Hurdles: Beyond the Standard Interview
Client interviews for senior roles typically involve multiple stages with various stakeholders, and their structure (or lack thereof) can vary wildly. However, recognising the significant cost of a bad hire, many large organisations incorporate rigorous, objective assessments:
The Tesco Example: During my time managing senior hiring at Tesco, final-stage candidates faced an extensive external assessment. This involved cognitive ability tests, in-depth psychometric profiling, and a lengthy behavioural interview with a qualified occupational psychologist (separate from the headhunter).
De-Risking the Hire: The output was a detailed report concluding with a simple risk rating: Red, Amber, or Green. An Amber or Red assessment could effectively veto the candidate, even after months of process. Why such rigour? Consider the often-cited research (highlighted by Forbes, drawing on CEB data) suggesting executive failure rates can be as high as 50-70% within 18 months of appointment. Formal assessment is seen as a crucial tool to mitigate this risk.
5. Offer Negotiations: The Delicate Final Hurdle
Securing the preferred candidate requires navigating the sensitive offer stage, a process fraught with potential pitfalls:
Expectation Gaps: Early assurances ("don't worry about the money") can evaporate when formal offers are constructed, hitting the reality of internal salary bands, benchmarking by the central Reward team, or scrutiny from the Board's Remuneration Committee.
Negotiation Nuance: It's a delicate dance. A candidate pushing too hard can leave a negative impression; an offer perceived as underwhelming can cause a favoured candidate to disengage.
Expertise Required: Structuring complex packages (LTIPs, buy-outs, guarantees) requires specialist knowledge, which smaller organisations might lack.
The search consultant acts as a vital intermediary here, managing expectations on both sides. Their role is critical, and yes, they have a vested interest – their final fee instalment typically depends on the successful conclusion of this stage, often linked to the final agreed compensation package.
Conclusion: An Imperfect Process
Executive search, therefore, is far from a perfect, predictable machine. It's a human endeavour susceptible to miscommunication, shifting priorities, unconscious biases, and complex negotiations. Understanding this messy reality provides crucial context for navigating the process as a candidate. But how are emerging technologies like AI impacting this landscape, potentially smoothing some bumps while perhaps creating new blind spots? We’ll tackle that in our next piece.
