the search after the prior search firm’s failure was canceled when the president resigned (for health reasons) and the client realized no one would take the job unless they knew they would fit well with the president. Then when a new president was hired a year later the org had already lined up someone for this position on their own so we were not needed. Of note, in my 23 years of doing executive search I’ve never had someone fail during the first year so even without using psych assessment tools our process has gotten some rather remarkable results.

A client is hiring a candidate and asked for my suggestion on an effective bonus plan so I suggested one I’ve used over the years. It has  an objective part (sales, profits, growth, etc.) and subjective part, yet it handles the subjective part is a way that supervisors are usually comfortable. We break down the subjective part (i.e., employee morale, external relationships, making good hires, etc) of the  15% of the bonus into 15 performance areas, thus 1% of bonus per area (you can weight it differently if you wish). The employee presents their own opinion on performance, i.e., the person thinks s/he deserves .75% of the 1% on brand improvement, then the boss does his/her own review, i.e., only thinks the employee deserves .65%. After the boss does the performance review just adds up the totals from all 15 points.

Anyone wanting the outline of this plan can just email me for it.

A recent candidate’s resume cited an MBA from California Coast University, “a nationally accredited school.” Sad to say for the uninformed one can get suckered into paying half the usual price for a degree that is not worth even that much. The right accreditation is by the regional association for accrediting colleges and universities. If in doubt check the schools accredited by that association and see if the expected universities are there. If not then don’t go there.

And worse yet are the “paper mills” where one’s experience and a $3,000 fee can get you whatever degree you’d like. If one’s ego is so big or judgment so poor someone gets one of those sheepskins then don’t expect to be one of our candidates.

Degrees by the University of Phoenix are “OK”, as are degrees earned on-line by schools that have regional accreditation.  But to this recruiter the quality of the school’s faculty and reputation of the school do mean a lot.  Just remember, while the degree may get you invited to an interview it’s what you’ve done after that that determines if you get the job.

Recently we proposed finding a CEO in financial services for a government entity. Not having done such an assignment before but having done numerous searches for search committees we teamed with a prestigious NYC search firm who specialized in financial industry searches…they’d done over 100 in the last four years! But…they didn’t do searches for search committees or governmental entities. The other search firm was to do the searching and we would handle the rest of the search. Great arrangement. Such an arrangement is a great way to best serve the client’s needs.

Clients of search firms often do not realize the major disadvantage a search firm doing many searches in one industry or function may have. For example, when doing two searches seeking the same type candidate will they possibly present the same person at the same time to two clients? Or would one recruiter make the resume not available to other recruiters in the firm until done with it thus depriving another client from considering that candidate? Both ways are a disadvantage to the client…thus why we don’t do multiple searches seeking the same type candidate at the same time. We must serve the best interest of each client so avoid that potential conflict of interest.

Many people go through life like they’re on automatic pilot….when they really should be asking why do I do what I do, what are the reasons behind that, how could I come across more effectively, is there a God, etc. To avoid going in the wrong direction or major mistakes (crashes) the questions must be asked, answers found and changes in direction applied. It just makes sense.

It’s a common phrase which applies to executives as well as organizations. If one doesn’t keep learning and the rest of the world does one is actually losing ground. We look for people who are lifelong learners.

I recently had a six-month long unpleasant experience. Someone used proprietary information of ours for financial gain. I would not take the person to court but I did strive for binding arbitration and the person refused. I firmly believe sometimes when a wrong can’t be righted it best to just let it be and go on. Court cases are such negative experiences they’re usually not worth the agony.

Today, when considering the hiring of an executive one must go past what used to be the appropriate background checks to now include an extensive “Google” search. Until now unknown dirty laundry may be thus revealed by so doing. For example, recently a private university announced its new president and within a week came forth evidence of questionable, perhaps indictable, actions that caused his removal at his prior school. Surely a “Google” search by the recruiter would have raised the issue beforehand.

Use of Myers-Briggs, StrengthFinders, etc., can be helpful in understanding a person and their fit.  But such should not take the place of a thorough interview and in-depth 360 degree reference checking.  One client hired us to re-do a search another search firm, which strongly pushes an assessment tool based on one’s motivation, had done.  The candidate hired thought they had an excellent management style and it was far from that.  Tests require a person to tell you how they view themselves…and that may be far from accurate.