6. Common quandaries
Speed, quality, cost
It is possible to achieve two of these things together, but never all three. One of the major hurdles in the recruitment of senior executive and non-executive leaders is organisations prioritising speed and efficiency over quality of process. The pressure to get things done fast – understandable as that is – and to cut corners to reduce the cost or timeframe usually leads to a less thorough exploration of the marketplace, a less positive candidate experience, and a less comprehensive examination of a candidate’s qualities.
The question of fit
The habit of recruiting in our own image is well-documented. Appointing for
‘fit’ is not always helpful. Hiring a CEO who already thinks and acts like the organisation or bringing in a plug-and-play chair or trustees can lead to issues of group-think, a reduction in creativity, or a perpetuation of structural or cultural issues that already exist. Rather than looking for those who ‘are like us’ look for those who will add something different to your culture, who complement what exists, and enhance it. Bringing in those who are able to look at your context, your organisation, or your mission, vision, and values and offer something fresh and new may not always feel natural, can sometimes take some getting used to, but is liable to be more rewarding in the long run.
The burden of responsibility
Organisations often hire leaders with the tacit expectation that the candidate do most if not all of the running. These senior individuals are expected to jump through a variety of hoops during the process, typically at short notice and with little feedback. Once they have landed, they are expected to quickly adapt themselves to the shape and style of the organisation. This is especially marked when candidates from less orthodox or more diverse backgrounds are hired. They are expected to assimilate and integrate. The burden for change rests entirely on their shoulders.
The priority paradox
‘Diversity is important, but not as important as X, Y, or Z.’ This debate surfaces periodically. It manifests itself in the apparently binary idea that you are either senior, experienced, talented, a ‘good fit’, or you are ‘diverse’. This is a dangerous logical fallacy. Diversity is not a separate challenge or priority – it is part of the solution to the many challenges and priorities you face.
The missing piece of the puzzle
It is easy to think of the recruitment of a chair, trustee or chief executive – arguably the most fundamental leadership components of your organisation – in isolation: an individual to be replaced, a gap to be filled, a piece of the puzzle to be found. Trying to recruit to fill the gap can be limiting. It relies on a narrow set of parameters. Thinking instead about the collective, about how other board trustees or senior leadership team members can ‘shuffle up’, take on different responsibilities, or play in a different formation can broaden your prospective talent pool and help you get more from the marketplace. Think ‘team’ rather than ‘individual’.
Approach avoidance
It is easy to begin any process with a stated aim to be bold, creative, broad and diverse. Carrying through on that ambition is harder if the real thinking hasn’t been done regarding how the process will deliver and how you will manage the outcomes accordingly. What tends to happen is that the bravery and risk-taking with which you started out dissipates once people start to look and sound different to what you or your stakeholders really envisaged. Over time, the external market will realise you are not being authentic, that there is a gap between what you say and what you do, and it will become harder to recruit the best and most innovative talent.
Outsourcing judgement
If using a partner, it is worth noting that while they have vast expertise in recruiting and appointing senior leaders and should be stewarding you with good advice at every stage, the decision on who to meet, who to interview, who to stand down, and who to appoint, rests with you. Your partner should provide you with as much material as possible to help inform your choices, but the responsibility lies with you to read a candidate’s expression of interest, to listen closely to their answers at interview, to check they meet the criteria you and your colleagues agreed upon at the outset of the process. You are in charge and should ensure you are getting the steer you need so that you can make the best decision available to you.
The diverse appointment
This is an increasingly common request and a laudable – if often naïvely articulated – aim. Unless you have done work already to make your organisation attractive and, ideally, inclusive; unless you run a transparent, equitable process; unless you address the conscious and unconscious biases you hold, this is challenging. If you are doing this yourselves, what have you done to reach a wider audience and how will you accommodate a broader array of talent than usual? What story can you tell about your strategy for becoming a more inclusive organisation? How will you widen the gates without lowering the bar? If you are working with a partner, what is their track record of successfully diverse and inclusive recruitment? Over what period?
