The Role Has Been Open for a Year. What Needs to Change?
A $90,000 Executive Search fee will attract scrutiny. A senior vacancy that has constrained growth for twelve months can attract rather less.
The fee appears in a proposal. The cost of the vacancy is spread across missed opportunities, overstretched colleagues and plans that have quietly moved into next year’s budget.
By the time a leadership position has been open for a year, the organisation has usually accumulated considerable recruitment activity. Candidates have been approached, interviews conducted and possibilities explored. The business still needs someone, but existing executives are covering the responsibilities and operations continue.
Eventually, someone proposes bringing in an executive search firm.
That may be the right decision. Before another search begins, however, leadership needs to establish what will make this attempt different.
What is another six months worth?
A vacancy does not need to threaten the business’s survival to be expensive.
A practice remains smaller than planned. Prospective clients receive insufficient attention. An expansion loses momentum because the person expected to lead it has never arrived. Existing executives keep things running, while spending less time on the responsibilities for which they were originally appointed.
Consider an illustrative senior commercial appointment expected to generate $2–3 million in additional annual revenue once established. At that level, six months represents $1–1.5 million in revenue opportunity.
That is a reference point for examining the business case, rather than an automatic calculation of loss. The actual revenue forgone depends on how quickly the person could have contributed, what colleagues have covered and the resources available to deliver the work. The financial assessment should also distinguish revenue from profit.
Nevertheless, the estimate deserves to be made. What has been deferred? What has gone elsewhere? What would realistically change if the right person joined?
At CGC, a search fee of 30% of annual guaranteed salary produces a one-off cost of $90,000 on an illustrative salary of $300,000. Against the commercial exposure of a prolonged vacancy, that is a relatively modest investment.
The adviser still needs to demonstrate a credible route to an appointment. But the fee should be considered alongside the value of resolving the vacancy, rather than assessed in isolation while another quarter disappears.
Twelve months should have produced more than a list of names
The starting point for a renewed search is a proper discovery discussion involving the hiring leadership, Talent Acquisition and the prospective adviser.
The previous search needs to be understood in detail. Who was approached? Which candidates declined immediately? Who withdrew after meeting the business? Were offers rejected? What reasons were given, and which concerns appeared repeatedly?
“We met some good people, but they weren’t quite right” is an observation that needs further investigation.
Perhaps candidates lacked an essential capability. Perhaps the people interviewing them had different expectations. Perhaps the opportunity sounded attractive initially but became less convincing as candidates understood the responsibilities, compensation or resources available.
Each explanation calls for a different response.
The review must also examine the recruitment work itself. Twelve months of activity does not prove that the relevant market has been covered thoroughly. Suitable people may have been overlooked, approached without sufficient context or never given a persuasive reason to engage.
For the hiring executive, the useful outcome is a clear account of where the appointment has broken down and what evidence supports that conclusion. Another shortlist has limited value if it simply recreates the previous discussion.
Agree a search that somebody can deliver
The business may discover that the role remains entirely viable, but needs more focused research and experienced candidate engagement. It may also find that the original requirements need to change.
If compensation repeatedly ended promising conversations, will the budget be reconsidered? If the responsibilities have expanded, does the package reflect them? If stakeholders want different things, who will settle the brief before candidates are approached?
These decisions need to be explicit. A search adviser should not return to market believing there is flexibility while the interview panel continues applying conditions that everyone supposedly agreed to revisit.
The available pool also needs an honest assessment. Combining a narrow specialism, local market experience, established relationships and a particular compensation range can leave very few credible possibilities. Leadership needs to understand which requirements protect the quality of the appointment and which unnecessarily restrict it.
For someone who has already declined, a renewed approach requires substance. Something must have changed in the opportunity, their circumstances or the understanding of what would make a move worthwhile. A different recruiter’s email signature is unlikely to be sufficient.
A year-old assignment can therefore require considerably more work than a fresh one. Previous objections must be investigated, gaps explored and confidence rebuilt. A contingency recruiter will weigh that effort against other assignments offering a clearer prospect of a placement. Simply adding suppliers does not secure dedicated attention.
The prospective search firm must make its own judgement too. It should explain why it believes the appointment is achievable, what remains uncertain and what the client must commit.
If the requested profile cannot realistically be attracted on the available terms, the adviser should say so. Where the business will neither change those terms nor reconsider its expectations, declining the assignment may be the most responsible advice available.
Leadership needs room in the diary to hire
An agreed brief and an approved retainer will accomplish little if candidates then wait weeks for the next conversation.
Senior executives travel, serve clients and manage demanding businesses. Those commitments are predictable. An important appointment needs protected interview time, agreed feedback deadlines and someone with the authority to keep decisions moving.
A senior hire may reasonably require several discussions, a case assessment and meetings with future colleagues. Each stage should answer a defined question. By the eighth conversation, everyone should at least know what remains undecided.
Before restarting, the business should agree who assesses which capabilities, who consolidates feedback and who can approve an offer. A practical commitment might be a response within two working days of an interview, with clear arrangements when a decision-maker is unavailable.
Talent Acquisition and the search adviser need to work to the same timetable. Candidates should understand the stages, receive updates and know when a decision is expected. The intended joining date must account for negotiations and notice periods as well as the interviews themselves.
The business is purchasing professional attention from its adviser. It must provide sufficient attention in return.
Give the restart a decision date
A renewed search should include a point at which leadership reviews the evidence and decides what happens next.
If credible candidates emerge, assess them against the agreed requirements. If the market continues to reject the proposition, decide whether to change it. If the original business case no longer holds, redesigning or pausing the appointment may be sensible.
Internal succession belongs in that discussion. A potential successor who remains two years from readiness after twelve months of vacancy leaves a possible three-year gap from the original need. Development is worthwhile, but the business still requires a plan for the intervening period.
The outcome should be a course of action that people have the resources and authority to carry through. Keeping a requisition open indefinitely is a poor substitute for that decision.
After a year, leadership should understand considerably more about the appointment than it did at the beginning. The next search needs to use that knowledge.
Before authorising another six months, ask what has changed sufficiently to justify expecting a different result.
If a critical leadership appointment has remained unresolved, speak to CGC about what has prevented the hire and whether a retained search offers a credible way forward.
Christopher ED Graham FCIPD, ACTP
Founder & Managing Director | C Graham Consulting Retained Executive Search & Leadership Advisory
.png)
Comments