Ideal interview process for a search firm

You would have thought that all search firms would be AMAZING at running their own hiring processes. After all, they advise their own clients on this Every. Single. Day. They must know the pitfalls to avoid, riiiight? 

Wrong. 

After years of working in search to search, we’ve seen so many examples of hiring processes which are not fit for purpose (alongside some great ones of course). So, here’s the Radiant guide to how to design the best hiring process for your search firm.

• Start the hiring process ahead of schedule. Hiring should be an ongoing effort, not a one-off initiative. There’s a very small market of really differentiated talent within search so aim to get to know the best people before you have a burning need. This is particularly true if you are correctly looking to develop a more diverse team. Build a shadow squad of talent at all levels of your firm. If one of your key people resigns, you should have an ongoing dialogue with 5-6 direct replacements already.

Before you start seeing candidates, make sure all key decision-makers have agreed:

• Who will be involved in the interview process
• How to describe the opportunity
• What is required to be successful in the role
• What criteria are being used to assess the candidates

Invest time to really articulate what differentiates your firm. Why should someone doing a similar job at a similar firm want to join your business? Have great examples of people your firm has helped to develop and progress. If you don’t have any examples, you need to think about why that is and make some changes.

Get clear on what candidates are looking for. At the junior level, priorities will typically be around development / mentoring / learning, plus work / life balance and upticks on base salaries to make getting a mortgage easier. At the senior level, it might be the chance to do more senior work, leverage your colleagues’ networks, or be in a less sharp-elbowed environment, with a competitive and transparent bonus structure being essential.

Create a compelling and truthful narrative about the firm, role and opportunity at hand. Make sure this is shared across the firm; clear messaging and alignment internally on these points is essential.

Recognise it’s unlikely that the best candidates will be actively looking for a new job. In most cases, the early rounds of a process will be focused on explaining your firm’s proposition to prospective candidates. Your aim should be that even if the candidate decides the timing is not right for a move, they come away with a positive impression of your organisation. A hiring process should be an opportunity for you to build your brand in the market.

To help people get excited about joining your firm, it’s often helpful to have a senior decision-maker, with charisma and who knows how to sell the opportunity, involved in the early stages. This sends a signal that hiring is a priority for your firm and something that senior people see the value investing time in. A senior person should be able to articulate the opportunity in a compelling fashion. There’s the added benefit that if the MD doesn’t think the candidate is right for the firm, then you don’t waste loads of people’s time interviewing, only for the candidate to get rejected at the final stages.

If psychometric testing is a key part of your process, have the candidate do that as soon as they are bought into the opportunity. There’s nothing more depressing than everyone raving about a prospective joiner, only for their psychometric assessment to scupper things at the end of a process, after people have invested so much time in interviews and meetings. Personally, I think psychometric results should inform the interview questions rather than be a dealbreaker on their own.

Be clear and intentional about how you’re assessing candidates, which questions are being asked and what issues need probing in interviews. Ideally, each interview is an opportunity to learn more about the candidate. Avoid repetition; not every interviewer needs to ask the candidate to walk through their experience. It is not a good candidate experience if candidates are asked to meet with 6-8 people separately but are asked the same questions each time. 

To avoid this, it’s also imperative that detailed feedback is shared throughout the process. This is helpful for the candidate to be able to address any concerns about their suitability for the role, but also ensures a joined-up approach from the team. Making sure all interviewers have read feedback from prior meetings is vital. 

I see a lot of comments on LinkedIn along the lines of ‘if a firm needs more than three meetings to decide whether to offer then walk away’. I don’t subscribe to that view. A longer process makes a lot of sense for a bigger firm where your success will be heavily dictated by the strength of your internal network. Colleagues often need to be bought into a hiring process to make sure the incoming person is set up for success.  But don’t start adding additional stages to the interview process at the 11th hour. Doubling up in interviews not only saves time but allows the candidate to see the dynamic between colleagues, giving a better feel for the culture. Get someone to come into the office for 3 hours and have them meet most of the people they need to in one go, rather than having them make repeat trips. Be comfortable offering a blend of VCs and F2F meetings.

However, momentum matters in hiring processes. Even the biggest search firms in the world can move quickly when required. Our record with one of the SHREKs was first interview to offer in seven days. That candidate has gone on to be a huge success. Longer interview processes are not always more thorough or effective.

Be clear about who should be a decision maker and who should be a stakeholder or ambassador for your firm. Who are the people who will decide whether or not to make a hire? Clearly, not every single person in a firm has equal rights in this regard. Who are the other stakeholders who need to be involved to help this person achieve success in their role? And who are the great ambassadors or culture carriers for your firm who can shed light on what life is really like at the firm? Too often we see people do the first 5-7 interviews only for the real decision maker to come in at the final round and say no to a candidate. This is not a good candidate experience and not a good use of anyone’s time. Equally, we’ve seen stakeholders (who think they’re decision-makers) veto a candidate for another team or practice. If a colleague won’t be line-managing or working with a candidate, their sector expertise is in a completely different area, and there are no concerns over a person’s culture fit – then what is the rationale for giving that person decision making rights?  From the outside it might raise some red flags about a firm’s culture. 

For Principal level and above I think it’s smart to get the candidate to write a small business plan to set out what they will prioritise in their first 30/60/90 days, and what a realistic / stretch goal could look like for year one. What does success look like in the role? What help do they need from their employer to help them succeed? Making sure all parties are on the same page is essential and ensures there’s no confusion around what was agreed during the interview process. Be realistic about timeframes - it (almost) always takes longer than you think for someone to adjust to a new platform.

Be candid about your firm’s strengths and weaknesses - if there is a gap between reality and rhetoric, you’ll have a higher attrition rate. Given how time-consuming hiring is, you don’t want to be having to replace people whose expectations you mismanaged on the way in. I see this SO MANY TIMES and it’s completely self-defeating. Surely, it’s far better to be honest about the changes you need to make to your organisation, and then implement them so that people join with their eyes wide open and can be part of that change. 

As a prospective employer, you should be DELIGHTED if you hear the candidate has been soft referencing your firm with people who have left. It shows they’re thorough and taking this seriously. If they uncover loads of skeletons in the closet from doing that, then that might be a good moment to work at fixing the problems so that people leave your firm reluctantly and will champion your business even after they are long gone.

Following these steps will help you find someone suitable for your role AND help to set them up for success. A good process will also help cement your reputation in the market; if a candidate finishes a process with a great impression of your firm, that good impression will be shared with their peers. Equally, if a candidate has a bad experience and leaves thinking ill of your firm, that information will also be shared. Reputations take time to build and are easily lost – think about this when you’re considering how to run your next process.

‍