THE STORY OF A SUCCESSFUL SEARCH

Introduction

Rarely does a search have such an impact in a community that the business press is hovering, waiting to pounce on the news of a hire. That was just the case in a search that I was recently retained to conduct and manage for the Executive Director of the Washington Wine Commission/Institute. I am pleased to report that the search was completed ahead of schedule, according to plan and with a candidate that met all the criteria that the search committee established. In order to bring the search to a successful conclusion, the project required my total focus for over three months.

As I reflect on what clients and potential clients might gain from sharing this news, I realize there is far more to know and understand about this complex process than clients assume. Very few hiring teams have had sufficient experience to prepare them for the twists and turns that can frustrate and undermine months of work. While not all of the questions or issues will apply to every search, this description should assist hiring managers to anticipate and commit the time necessary for a successful outcome.

The Wine Commission search was a consensus-driven process that started where all successful searches begin - from the inside out. So many times I am asked what contacts I have in a particular industry, as if that were one of the key criteria in determining if my firm should be selected for an assignment. That knowledge is useful at a tactical level but is a small factor in the success of a project.

To those involved in a strategic in-depth search, much like this assignment, finding a candidate is 20% of the total search effort. The other 80% relates to strategy, documentation, process, evaluation, client communication and candidate support. Bringing a search to a successful conclusion is very different from identifying finalists. That is where the value-add, insight, instinct and commitment to completion come into play. An experienced search professional knows what steps the client (having less familiarity with search) should take and what information is needed to complete the process. In this case, it was my responsibility to anticipate and provide those services before I was asked. My specialized knowledge of the specific job function proved valuable, as well.

Internal Research: The Essential First Step

Internal research is critical to success--to developing an initial in-depth understanding of the organization, the culture and values that shape it. Then, a carefully constructed job description and candidate qualifications list are created and approved. Until those elements are in place and agreed to by those involved in the hiring decision, no interviewing or selection of potential candidates is relevant. Developing candidates at too early a stage in the process is confusing and counterproductive.

Particularly in consensus driven organizations, which include corporations and others such as associations, partnerships, professional services (law and financial consulting) firms, these documents are the essential tools that lead to a clear plan of action and timetable. I strive to bring a fresh perspective that adds value and leads to creative thinking. With 25 years of experience searching different industry segments, knowledge of how to reach the right candidates in targeted companies is a given.

External Research and the Internal Process to Achieve Consensus: The Essential Second Step

Once the internal research phase is completed, research begins. Through research and outreach to relevant audiences, both “searched out” (e.g. solicited specifically for the position) and interested candidates, who apply directly, are identified. At the same time, a complex internal process begins to achieve consensus for the decision when the hiring team is ready to select finalists. The success of a search rests squarely on the internal effort expended during this phase.

Due to the number of decision-makers and the goal to achieve unanimous agreement, important questions arise which should be considered early in this research phase, without time pressures. For example, these were all questions that were answered during the search I conducted for Washington Wine.

What constitutes a, “Decision to Hire?” Must there be unanimous agreement? What is acceptable? What constitutes a “no” vote that will eliminate a candidate? Do all voting decision-makers (the search committee) have equal weight? Is one requirement so important that if the candidate, once evaluated, lacks sufficient experience or capability, will s/he be eliminated?

How will interviews be structured both at the semi-final and finalist stage? How many members of the hiring team will be involved at each juncture? What locational challenges exist? Is the hiring team located in one city or will the interviewing process involve travel to more than one location? Are the candidates local and/or national? The goal is to cluster interviews within a short timeframe to keep impressions fresh and to maintain the momentum for completing the assignment.

How many semifinalists can be accommodated? How many finalists will the interviewing team feel capable of evaluating? Assuming a timetable and a plan, what prior commitments prevent the hiring team from being available? How do these practical considerations impact the search?

How will the interviews be organized both in content and format? Will there be group and/or social interactions as well as one-to-one meetings? What feedback/questions might the candidate have? How should that be handled? Should the candidate take time in the interviews for his/her questions?

What ranking process will be established? How shall the most important experiences and qualities in the job description be translated into an evaluation tool?

How will the search committee be made aware of the candidate pool? How does the confidential nature of a search mesh with the needs of the hiring team? For many organizations, the unsolicited candidates are “special friends” who, irrespective of qualifications, require careful attention and respectful communication. How do I work with the search committee so that all candidates receive appropriate feedback? In some searches diversity questions may arise that require thoughtful consideration.

Throughout this effort, it is essential that regular status reports be provided to the hiring team, and with their approval, to those within the organization that wish to follow the progress of the assignment. At each juncture where there are questions and potentially sensitive issues to explore, it is my responsibility as search consultant to discuss them before making any decisions or assumptions that could lead to incorrect steps.

Candidate Evaluation and Selection: The Essential Third Step

Critically important is the evaluation of the candidates and the insight gleaned from interviews and references. The hiring team may ask me to explore any questions/concerns through a thorough reference check. Reports were provided prior to the final meeting to select the Executive Director.

References that I prepare are used as a tool to help the incumbent succeed and transition successfully into the new job. If I discover an issue that should be addressed, I will alert the client and the candidate, when appropriate. Advance planning and discussion prior to the offer stage remove many of the potential obstacles that could derail a search. Honesty and feedback are important tools toward making a hire a successful incumbent.

The most critical meeting leading to success is when the search committee gathers to discuss the ranking of the finalists. The meeting should be held as quickly as possible after finalist interviews are completed. How that meeting is organized and how the facilitator establishes the framework for the discussion and decision making process can account for the success (or failure) of the entire effort. Providing an agenda with a timetable and background information, in addition to the references, helps expedite the discussion.

The first question to answer is, “Do we have finalist(s) suitable for hire?” Fundamental as this sounds, if there are sufficient reservations about finalists, then the search should be extended and no offer made.

Assuming a happier outcome (as was the case with Washington Wine) and there are finalist(s), another question is whether the #2 candidate is suitable for hire, as a backup. Hopefully, there is sufficient bench strength for the answer to be a “yes.”

Following the agenda for the meeting should allow the voting members to each express his/her evaluation and ranking of the finalist(s) to determine if there is general consensus before any more elaborate and detailed analysis is conducted. The search committee will hopefully be fully satisfied with the finalist selected through this process. In advance of the meeting all the details surrounding an offer will have been decided, including who will extend it.

An immediate effort should be made to extend an offer to the finalist and as quickly as possible, personally inform those that were not selected about the disappointing news. If the search is newsworthy as was the Washington Wine assignment, then a press release should be prepared and distributed as soon as the official offer letter is signed.

All of these elements came into play as the search for the Executive Director was concluded with the hire of a top-flight professional with a mix of wine association, communication and global travel experience. I was delighted to be part of the team.

TOP

THE REALITY OF THE VALLEY: THE “LEFT BEHIND” COMMUNICATOR

As the market gradually improves and reputable, market leading companies rebuild communications staffs, a category of skilled communicator is being left behind. I had a long discussion with a professional that I have known over a 20-year span. As we looked at the challenges he was facing, I realized it was not only his problem. It was an issue affecting an entire category of professionals. I wish there were a solution to “catching up” in the marketplace, but the challenges he faces are generic.

This individual (let’s call him Tim) began his career in the mid 70ties starting in the agency world with reputable firms, but not focused on technology-based organizations. The tech world had not yet taken off. By the early 80ties, with several very good years at a smaller agency, he joined a growing national firm with impressive tech clients. Within 4-years, he was a Vice President.

It was now the late 80ties and professionals with sufficient experience to lead accounts and manage resources were in demand. It was a magical time. With 15-years of good agency experience, a manager could chose among options. Opportunities abounded and jobs and work were far in excess of the talent pool of appropriately experienced people to competently complete the work.

Tim launched his own business and won clients ranging in size from start-ups to Fortune 1,000 companies. PR projects were long-term, focusing primarily on supporting marketing initiatives through product publicity. The demand for this capability far exceeded the resources available and he was fully engaged. For him, the question was what to select from what came to his doorstep and how to balance work and other demands.

He continued in his own business from that point forward, building a career that was entrepreneurial, successful and diverse. There was never an opportunity in-house that could tempt him to give up his business.

That all changed when the market crashed. It was time to scramble. Lucrative long-term contracts were no longer available. There were so many people out of work that formed their own free-lance agencies while job hunting, that it was hard to distinguish who was good and committed versus who was opportunistic and seeking a temporary solution during the economic crunch.

As the market crashed, Tim found that for all his history, contacts, relationships, etc., he was in a survival mode. He needed work and took what he could find. The base of business changed and instead of long-commitments, clients were parceling out projects. At first everyone impacted was seeing this as a temporary course correction. After several years of scrambling for contracts, we are all adjusted to the new market conditions.

Tim is asking a fundamental question, “Is this all? Is this what my work will look like for the next ten years that I have left to my career? He now has almost 30-years of agency and project management PR experience. Where can he go?

While he can earn an adequate amount, project work is not challenging, nor does it give him an ability to contribute to strategy or long-term planning.

The market has started to improve but the hiring is along very specific lines. Mid-level corporate opportunities (under $100k) are where there are strong needs with an experience requirement of from 10-15 years. As we move up to the Director and VP levels, prior corporate experience is required and a maximum of 20-years is considered ideal.

In the agency world, top tier firms are reluctant to hire a senior manager who has been on his own for more than a few years. The fear is that the new hire might be set in his ways and not be able to mesh with the style of a larger organization. Moreover, 30 years of work experience will be too much experience for most hiring organizations. The candidate will be seen as overqualified and past his peak performance years.

As Tim and I brainstormed about where he could fit, we thought of several possible directions, but recognize others in similar situations are competing for precisely the same opportunities.

He might need to take a step down and work in a smaller less prestigious agency. While major companies might find his experience, “not a good fit with our culture,” he might do very well in a small to medium-sized organization where the ability to juggle and handle many areas of communications (e.g. marcom, branding and PR) are essential. Exploring both of these directions demands thorough research and can be very time consuming. The smaller organizations cannot afford the visibility through job sites (and the deluge of resumes) so the job seeker must find them.

It was somewhat comforting to Tim that I could confirm that what was a challenge for him was impacting other seasoned communicators. The fact is that those professionals whose careers were interrupted around 2000-2001 with 25+ years of experience have very few options. The hiring profiles that employers seek peak at the 15 to 20-year level. If more experience is desired, it is generally for a very senior-level position that requires a different track record than most of the consultants in the Valley. The market collapsed and like Tim, they will not be able to resume careers at the levels they had previously achieved.

TOP