Wickland Westcott

Executive Search and Corporate Reputation

After a few minutes thought, most people can probably recall job interviews they have experienced throughout their career.  They'll remember whether they were good, bad or indifferent and the chances are they'll have at least one horror story to tell.  In every case the experience will have coloured their view of the headhunter and, by association, the recruiting organisation.

The way senior executives are treated during a recruitment process is transmitted to the market through the 'bush telegraph'. Where the candidate experience is good the client's corporate reputation is enhanced, drawing the best talent towards those organisations.  Unfortunately, the reverse is also true, and poor experiences make it harder to attract good people in future.

Wickland Westcott has gathered candidate feedback over the last 5 years and has studied the results in detail. So, what is the secret to creating an outstanding experience for potential hires and ensuring that even those who are unsuccessful walk away feeling well-treated? To find the answer to this question, you have to 'walk with' a candidate through the journey of a job application.

When approached, most search candidates are already in some form of employment, and all will have a series of responsibilities and commitments that will need to be modified if a new role is taken on. Considering a new job requires careful thought, and maybe preliminary conversations with the family.  So the first thing a search candidate wants is honesty: is this a real role that the client is genuinely looking to fill, or is this simply a procedural exercise before the client appoints the internal candidate who has already been earmarked? Search candidates quickly detect if they are involved in a benchmark exercise and the hiring of a 'surprise' internal candidate at the last stage is annoying for all involved - denting corporate reputation and causing candidates to view any future approach with suspicion.

During the selection process search candidates rightly demand regular feedback and communication. They also expect a reasonably frank appraisal of how they sit in relation to the other candidates you are speaking to. For example, are they one of three candidates the client is meeting, or are there more names in the frame?

As the search nears completion, emotions and expectations begin to run high and it is important for the client organisation to act decisively so that candidates know where they stand.  Asking the search Consultant to 'keep people warm' whilst negotiations proceed with the preferred candidate is damaging, as the rest of the shortlist intuitively detect what is happening. In any case, hiring organisations rarely take their 'number two' candidate from the list, preferring to start again.  Client organisations should expect to be challenged by the Wickland Westcott in these situations – this is done first and foremost to protect the client’s reputation.

Unsuccessful candidates, handled badly, have very long memories. We have a main board client who was headhunted for a role seven years ago. He was unsuccessful at the shortlist stage but the hiring firm failed to stand him down.  He mentions it whenever he is retaining us on a new role, and is highly uncomplimentary about the search firm concerned, and more importantly, the client organisation. How many other people does he mention it to?

At the culmination of the selection process, the candidate will be successful or unsuccessful in securing the role. But if the journey ends there, most candidates will be unhappy. Having invested time into the process, they have a (not unreasonable) expectation of receiving meaningful feedback.

Often this is not forthcoming. The lack of feedback may be because the client is too busy, or is uncomfortable delivering bad news. This is where good headhunters earn their corn. The role of a search Consultant largely involves managing expectations and delivering disappointing news, as only one individual is appointed for each search.  All too often, the runners-up are told that “it was a very close thing, you were second on the list and the other candidate was a little closer to the specification”.  This leaves them with nothing to learn from the experience and no way to improve their approach.  It is therefore critical to provide honest, prompt, sensitive and specific feedback. In most cases, candidates are highly appreciative, and take a positive view of the recruiting organisation and the headhunter.

In summary, each and every search should be regarded as an opportunity for the organisation to enhance the market’s view of their leadership qualities, values, and employer brand.  If organisations fail to consider the candidate journey and simply treat the search as a mechanical process, the supply of talent willing to join the Board or senior team could dry when it is most needed.

How does Wickland Westcott stack-up in this area? The latest candidate data (September 2010) based on nearly 2000 anonymous responses, rates our interview experience as follows: Excellent 90%, Reasonable 9.7%, Less Than Satisfactory 0.3%, Very Poor 0%.

Share This Thought Leadership Article

Recipient Name

Recipient Email Address

Your Name

Message

Verification Code

Enter the letters as they are shown in the image