What executive recruiters notice that HR candidates don't realize they're showing
When senior HR professionals prepare for an interview, they naturally focus on what they are going to say.
What are my achievements? How do I explain my departure? How do I demonstrate commerciality? How do I explain my leadership style?
All sensible questions. But executive recruiters are also paying attention to something else.
How you behave.
Not because we're trying to catch you out. But because at senior level, behavior provides information. And sometimes candidates reveal considerably more than they realize.
How do you talk about your former employer?
This is one of the first things experienced recruiters notice. You may have had a terrible experience. Perhaps the CEO was difficult. Perhaps the board made poor decisions. Perhaps the culture was dysfunctional. Perhaps your predecessor left an impossible mess. Perhaps you were made redundant because of a decision you strongly disagreed with.
You may be completely justified. But if every previous employer was incompetent, every CEO was unreasonable and every board was political, a recruiter may eventually start wondering: what is the common denominator and recurring theme, and why has so much bad luck followed this HR leader?
You don't have to pretend everything was wonderful. But senior leaders should be able to describe difficult experiences without sounding consumed by them.
How do you describe your achievements?
There is a big difference between: “I transformed the organization” and “I inherited an organization with significant capability gaps. We changed the leadership structure, introduced a new talent framework and redesigned the operating model. Over three years, turnover reduced and we were able to support a significant international expansion.”
The second version gives the listener something to work with. It explains the problem, your intervention and the result and sounds credible.
Senior candidates sometimes overstate their achievements because they assume confidence means certainty. It doesn't. Credibility is often more powerful than self-promotion.
Do you take responsibility?
One of the most revealing questions in an executive interview is: “Tell me about something that didn't go well.”
Many leaders from all specialist areas of the HR profession struggle enormously with this. They explain why the problem wasn't really their fault. The board didn't listen. The CEO changed direction. The business didn't invest. The team resisted. The market changed.
All of those things may be true. But leadership isn't about controlling everything. It's about taking responsibility for what you can control. A strong answer might be: “I underestimated the level of change fatigue in the organization. We moved too quickly, and I should have spent more time bringing the leadership team with us. We eventually corrected it, but it changed how I approached transformation projects in the company after that.”
That's an executive answer that shows self-awareness, authentic ownership of issues, and an ability to pivot - all valuable leadership qualities.
Are you actually listening?
Senior HR professionals are often very good communicators. Sometimes too good. You can tell when someone has prepared an answer to every conceivable question and it can create doubt.
Ask about leadership. They give a leadership speech.
Ask about culture. Another speech.
Ask about commerciality. Another speech.
But interviews are conversations. Recruiters are watching whether you listen to the question. Do you answer what was actually asked? Do you pause before responding? Do you ask a clarifying question? Do you show curiosity? Do you allow the other person to finish?
These things matter. Particularly for an HR leader who may be expected to spend their next few years advising a CEO and influencing a board.
Do you understand the business?
One of the biggest differences between a good HR executive and an outstanding one is commercial understanding. If you are interviewing for a CHRO position and spend the entire conversation discussing HR processes, talent frameworks, engagement surveys and leadership development, you may be missing the point.
The CEO doesn't necessarily need another person to tell them how to run HR. They need someone who understands the business and can explain how people capability affects the business. What happens to margins? What happens during growth? What happens when you acquire a company? Where is productivity being lost? What capabilities will be needed in three years? Where is the leadership bench weak? What organizational risks are emerging? That's the conversation that executive recruiters are used to when hiring the best executives in the HR function.
How do you treat people who cannot help you?
This is a subtle one. How do you interact with the recruiter? How do you treat the assistant arranging your interview? How do you respond when scheduling becomes inconvenient? Are you courteous? Are you responsive? Do you become impatient? Do you treat junior people differently from senior people?
You may think these interactions are peripheral. They're not. People notice. And if you're interviewing for a role where you will be expected to influence people across an organization, those small behaviors can provide surprisingly useful information.
Are you too polished?
This may sound strange. But sometimes the most polished candidate isn't the most compelling. If every answer sounds rehearsed, every weakness has been turned into a strength and every failure has somehow produced a leadership lesson, the person sitting opposite you may struggle to understand who you actually are. Senior hiring decisions involve risk. People want to know what you're really like.
Authenticity doesn't mean being unprepared. It means being sufficiently comfortable with your own career that you don't have to manufacture perfection.
And then there is the question you weren't asked
Experienced recruiters are always looking for consistency.
Does your CV match your story?
Does your LinkedIn profile match your CV?
Does the way you describe yourself match the references?
Does your explanation of your departure make sense?
Does your leadership philosophy match the examples you give?
None of this means candidates should be paranoid. It simply means that the whole interaction is part of the assessment. The interview isn't just the 60 minutes when questions are being asked. It starts earlier. And it continues afterwards.
The lesson
You don't need to perform differently. You need to be aware. Because recruiters aren't only asking: “Can this person do the job?”
They're also asking: “Would I be comfortable putting this person in front of my client?”
And ultimately: “Would I trust this person to lead and deliver well, and fairly?”
At executive level, those are very different questions. And sometimes the answers come from what you do when you aren't trying to answer them.
About the Author
Sally-Anne is appreciated across her leadership network for her constructive honesty and care. As a senior partner she brings many years of career experience supporting executives in their search for new career challenges, and in their search for high performing talent for their own teams.