Not every executive or managerial role requires the very best talent available. Of course, it’s not politically correct for most companies to admit this, but in general, once an organisation reaches a “critical mass” of talent, what it really needs are solid, loyal performers. This is particularly true in organisations that are in a phase of moderate growth or maturity. In periods of rapid expansion or double-digit growth, it may make sense to recruit high-potential profiles to develop internally. Talent should always be aligned with the economic and business cycle it is being hired into.
Many Key Talent development programmes look great on paper, but when expectations aren’t met, some participants even prefer to hide the fact that they were involved. Why? Because time reveals everything: the company may discover that not every year is a year of growth or opportunity — and there may be no room to promote everyone who was groomed for it. The employee, on the other hand, may realise they have many more chances to confirm whether the Peter Principle applies and if they’ve already reached their level of incompetence.
A simple way to avoid this demotivation trap is not to over-hire from the start. Many readers will recall a situation like this: a company went out to hire externally for a particular reason, but the real goal was to find someone who could deliver results quickly, with the right background and experience — and some candidates were even ruled out for being overqualified or “above the role”. Nobody insisted on hiring the brightest mind from the direct competition.
Our recommendation for hiring a good, solid, and effective candidate — not necessarily exceptional — is to use passive recruitment methods: job ads in print or online, or tapping into informal professional networks. Among the final candidates who match the job requirements, there will likely be people motivated by change (who applied voluntarily), and from there, the right profile may emerge — someone capable of delivering today.
The risk with passive methods is that, if they fail, the company must start over: identifying, interviewing, persuading, offering, and hiring — again and again — until they finally land the right person. Many recruitment firms offer filtering services for large applicant pools, using various methodologies. In these cases, the consultant matches applicants against the job specs, but won’t actively scout or persuade top professionals in the market — many of whom are happily employed and would require real effort to convince.
Recruiting the best
Outstanding executives are often discovered unexpectedly. Many have grown within the organisation. They lead, optimise, inspire, anticipate — and do many things that make us admire them and wish we had more like them. And that’s the challenge. The best candidates are high-impact professionals in strategic roles and are often protected by targeted retention plans. If they are not unhappy, they’re not actively looking — so the challenge lies in attraction, not just identification.
Direct search — also known as Executive Search or headhunting — is a proactive method that guarantees a rigorous, structured process. Executive Search consultants map out the target market, identify relevant companies, and systematically contact potential candidates to gather accurate, current insights on availability, interest, and suitability. The client doesn’t just choose the best fit from a pool of applicants — the consultant identifies the ideal candidate and does the work of persuading and selling the opportunity.
That is why an experienced consultant remains critical for delivering value to both sides: to the company, by helping secure the best talent for a key role, and to the candidate, who views the headhunter as a trusted advisor — and can benefit from focused, professional coaching.
Professional Executive Search consultants (at least those affiliated with the AESC, and likely others) commit their expertise, reputation and rigour to “getting it right the first time” — delivering true consulting value: an effective and efficient process.
Originally published in RRHH Digital, January 18, 2010
