We Are Discerning; You Be Discerning As Well
Happy New Year! (My feeling – I can keep saying ‘Happy New Year’ through this week – call it mid-January.)
People commonly ask me what I do for a living. Depending on my mood and where I am/who I am with (and the questioner – how I know them, my openness to explaining what Retained Executive Search is, etc.), I commonly answer with the following statement:
- “I judge people for a living.”
I am not sure I like the answer, but it is factually true. That is what my firm is paid to do. Allow me to explain.
Asking the Same Question to a Candidate More Than Once
We as a Retained Executive Search Firm are hired to help fill key senior-level openings. Regardless of the reasons for being retained by our clients, our job is very specific.
Each interaction we have with a prospective candidate is a chance to learn about them and their past. Past performance is a predictor of future performance. When I ask questions, I take notes. Prior to the next interaction with the same candidate, I review the notes. This helps me to identify areas I want to pursue or review. I ask; they answer – I compare. I look for themes, overlap and consistency.
Salary – the State of Minnesota no longer allows us to ask directly about salary. We simply tell candidates the hiring target range and wait for a response. The range is not negotiable (I have talked about this in previous Blogs); it is what it is. The way the candidate responds tells me their feeling about the number. It is a judgement point.
Transition history – we all make moves for varying reasons. If there are inconsistencies between a candidate’s resume and LinkedIn profile, these are addressed before an interview – and commonly result in the candidate not moving forward. (This has also been discussed in past Blogs – see https://www.abelnmagy.com/blog/titles-and-dates.) This is also a judgement point.
I start each formal interview with a ‘chronological history review’ – talking about moves from job to job (whatever is listed on the resume). Patterns emerge. Using my statement above – past performance is a predictor of future performance – can I assume the same outcome if I project forward to the candidate getting the position I am working to fill? When a candidate tells me they are always open to a call from a recruiter, I make a judgement. (The irony of this is not lost on me – I AM a recruiter AND I made the call.)
At each step in our process, we make a decision to continue forward or turn the candidate down for the role being discussed.
Candidates Need To Be Discerning (As Well)
Not every position is the right position for candidates. When I call about an opening, it is a legitimate opening. We don’t make openings up; we don’t troll for candidates to build a database. We reach out to hundreds of people knowing that we are seeking one.
We expect candidates to be discerning. Is the opening right for them? Is it a good career move? Is the timing right for them? We reached out for a reason – their backgrounds on ‘paper’ or from our past interactions with them make us believe they could be a good fit. We are not yet certain, but certain enough to do the outreach.
Candidates that are employed are more discerning than those that are not. We do reach out to people in transition (or find out a person is in transition when we talk with them). We expect them to be discerning. Interestingly enough, we need to be more judgmental when talking to those in transition. Why? Our history shows that a candidate in transition sees most positions as the perfect match. Yet we know a bad match represents failure to us (and to all involved).
We As A Search Firm Ask Many Questions – We Want Candidates To Do The Same
The perfect position match involves a great deal of interaction with all parties. The best candidates are the ones that dig in. They want history; they want to know the nuances of the role and the organization. They want to meet everyone involved. They assess along the way. They are interested but appropriately inquisitive. They often say no – not our favorite answer but often the right one.
As we moved toward the end of 2024, we saw more candidate turn-downs, an ‘interesting’ trend. What does that tell us? This will be the subject of a future Blog.
As mentioned above, at each step in our process, we make a decision to continue forward or turn the candidate down. We think candidates should do the same.
Our conclusion – let’s all be more discerning as a way to quickly and effectively get to the best outcome for all involved.
Happy New Year!