Are people honest about their current compensation with you? It seems that's one area where people would be tempted to fudge.
I encourage people always to be honest with an executive recruiter. We will sometimes ask for verification from the W-2 form. Also, when I'm doing the final reference, which is usually with the individual's most recent boss, I will ask the individual's compensation. And of course, if you're with a public company and you're one of the top-paid executives, it is public record anyway. If you inflate your salary early on, it could backfire. There could be other candidates who are making less money and who therefore might be a little more attractive to the client. The fact that you inflated your salary by 10 or 15 percent could eliminate you as a candidate. The big increases that people used to associate with changing companies are no longer there; it used to be the norm to expect a 20 to 25 percent increase when changing companies; now 10 to 15 percent would be quite generous.
Candidates may also be tempted to say, "What I'm making now is not relevant."
I will not pursue someone who will not tell me. And yet on the converse, I feel it's only fair to the candidate to know what my client is paying in terms of the base and a bonus. Often there could be flexibility, but I want the candidate to know up front how close or far apart we are.
How do you find employee candidates?
First we target with our client where this person might be, what kind of industry background we want the candidate to have, and, many times, specific companies. Sometimes companies want to recruit directly from their own industry, so the person will come in with knowledge of that industry. Other times they will want to go to a completely different industry for a new viewpoint and perspective. Then our director of research uses books and directories to try to identify individuals within those industries and companies who, at least by virtue of their title, might be potential candidates or sources of candidates. We also maintain a database of candidates from previous searches, which at this point is up to about 3,000 to 4,000 people.
Do you prefer employed candidates?
Ten years ago I would ask the question: "Will you consider candidates who are unemployed?" Clients would say, "I don't want to see anyone who is unemployed." A couple of years later, they would think for a minute and then say, "Well, I guess so, if they're unemployed for the right reasons-an acquisition or the company was divested. But they'd have to be really good." The next stage was, "You know, you might be able to find some candidates who are unemployed and really a little more qualified than we need. But perhaps because they're unemployed they'd be willing to look at this opportunity." So it was almost a plus. And now, I have clients who got to their present positions after being unemployed. They understand. The stigma is not there as much.
How do you evaluate and measure potential candidates?
The first evaluation is: Does that person's work experience match what my client is seeking from a technical or functional perspective? We're forgetting the individuals at this point; we are truly just looking at the industries they have been with, the companies they've been with, the positions they've held, the management and budget responsibilities they've had, and results or accomplishments in those jobs. This is primarily a paper evaluation-looking at a resume.
Then you get into the issue of assessment, and it's important to know not only what your clients say they want, but you have to pick up nuances. Most clients today are seeking someone who can have an impact on their organization, who is going to be worth more to that company than the previous person who was in that position, or is going to be some sort of catalyst. You have to assess your client's culture to see what kind of person, what kind of approach, what kind of interpersonal style, even what kind of image is going to fit best. That person has to have technical and personal credibility and be able to establish rapport throughout the organization.
Have you recruited many women to top-level positions?
Ten years ago clients would say, "No, I don't think a woman would be a good candidate because the corporate culture wouldn't accept her or a minority." And, although that may have been the case, they certainly didn't want to be proactive about changing that culture. Then it was, "Gee, if you could find a qualified female or minority, yes, I would consider them." So it was still not a very aggressive stance. Now it is almost expected that there will be women and, hopefully, minorities on any candidate slate.
