The CEO candidate calls me, rather crestfallen. “The interview was marked by mistrust. Formally it was fine. You can’t quite put your finger on it, but I could feel it all the more!”
Later, he is exactly the one who receives an offer.
He turns it down.
Five assumptions we come across in client briefings – and what we can say about them from real selection processes:
“Our investment is top-class. The best are queuing up.”
The best are not queuing up anywhere. They hold positions of responsibility, are well paid and are approached regularly. They pick very carefully which headhunters they want to talk to. “Equal footing” and “authenticity” are the key words. Anyone who only sells in the conversation loses exactly the candidates they wanted.
“You should generally distrust executive search consultants. They don’t check anything, they just sell us the leftovers at a premium.”
There may be firms that work like that. I don’t know. And I don’t want to accuse any of our competitors, some of whom are very capable, of doing so. We don’t do that. We signal who has which ties to a commitment. The answer is not mistrust but transparency: anyone who researches properly is happy to show it. Even someone who has been looking for half a year can be the top candidate for exactly this assignment.
“Candidates exaggerate wildly.”
Yes, a bit of self-promotion is part of the game. On both sides. That is why we ask about figures, the starting point, the team (in connection with AI), and what went wrong. I actually find the question of what went wrong the most interesting of all. Personally, it is what I have learned the most from in my life. “We grew strongly” is not an answer. Exaggeration shows up at the second follow-up question – not in the CV. At the latest in the references.
“We already know the right people. From our network.”
Yes, the network is valuable – as a source, not as a shortlist. The familiar name is rarely tested against the market. Shared history then replaces the question of fit with exactly this situation, this value creation lever, this team. In my experience, one of the most expensive mistakes in appointments – especially among very smart decision-makers.
“They didn’t leave to develop further. They were fired.”
In the PE environment, a change of leadership is often part of the investment cycle, not a verdict on a person. What matters is whether someone can explain what happened and what part they played. Someone who blames only others at every stage – that is the signal. Not the separation itself.
The real problem:
A lack of appreciation towards the outside and mistrust on the inside are two sides of insecurity. And candidates sense this faster than any equity story.
Which of these five sentences have you heard yourself – or thought?
