3 Things Everyone Gets Wrong About Executive Search

Part 1. There’s way more than 3.

There used to be a popular phrase. “Nobody ever got fired for hiring IBM.”

Showing my age here, I know. People these days either don’t know what IBM is. Or haven’t thought of them in a decade. Which is the point.

They were the kings of the Prestige Sale. When big companies needed to make big decisions about their tech infrastructure, hiring IBM was the go to play.

Not because they were the best or most innovative. But because they were the safe play, for your career as a decision maker. If things broke, no one could have done any better.

Now it’s a punchline. IBM is still around and kicking, but they’re not on the top of anyone’s mind when it comes to modern leaders in technology innovation.

Executive search has the same problem.

Half of Hirewell’s executive search wins comes from one of two things: a failed search where one of the Big Five exec search firms fell flat. Or a buyer who had that experience previously and it left a bad taste in their mouth. (So one thing really.)

They bought reputation and received mediocrity. For a ton of money. At a critical time.

And it all comes down to false perceptions in 3 areas:

1. Only big firms have access to top executives.

There’s one firm who literally says “we have a deep network who will only talk to us.”

Literally nothing could be further from the truth. In terms of access (top of the recruiting funnel), I’m going to say something that will blow your mind:

👉Executives are the easiest people in the world to engage to discuss career opportunities.

They get the least amount of things coming their way (because there aren’t that many roles comparatively). And everything that does is a phenomenal position (and pay) that most people can only dream of.

2. Companies only need help making the right hire.

When an exec fails, it’s not always because they were the wrong person for the job. It’s because they weren’t set up for success or weren’t given the tools

They weren’t quick enough to build trust, immerse themselves in the culture, understand internal politics, build the right team under them, and understand where their hire may have ruffled feathers inside the org.

You’ll notice: these soft skills, not hard skills they were recruited for.

We all know that leadership training is lacking, pretty much everywhere. Spending a ton of money for an exec search with a firm who doesn’t have the ability to provide post hire support is like lighting money on fire.

Speaking of money…

3. Percentage based fees are kind of insane.

No matter who you use, exec search is expensive. But why is it also variable?

The ‘candidate upsell’ method is a sure fire way to jack up fees. You know what’s better than 30% of 300k? 30% of 400k. Or 500k. Or a million.

It’s not like finding more expensive comparison candidates ‘cost’ tens of thousands more to recruit.

Mutually agreed to flat rates are so insanely easy to do. Everyone wins.

Your CFO will thank you.