How executive recruitment finds leaders who actually make a difference

When I started the search 18 months ago for a CFO for a manufacturing business going through major expansion, the client’s original brief was clear: they wanted a qualified accountant, manufacturing experience, and a strong systems background. Pretty standard stuff.

What we learned in our subsequent conversations was something much more: they needed someone who could speak fluent “operations” to a founder who lived and breathed the factory floor, while also building the financial infrastructure for a business about to triple in size.

The successful candidate had started their career in logistics and production engineering before moving into finance. He understood the effect of a two-day delay in raw materials on the entire P&L, and he could explain working capital management using the language of production cycles rather than accounting theory.

Nine months later, the business had secured its biggest contract ever because the CFO had restructured its pricing model to reflect true operational costs.

That’s executive recruitment in the my world. It’s rarely about finding someone who ticks every box on a clients job description. It’s about understanding what will drive success in that business, at that time, and finding the person who can deliver it.

If you lead a business or team and are thinking of engaging a recruiter for your leadership appointments, these are some of the things you should be looking for. If you prefer to do your own search and hiring I hope you find some of the following helpful.

What’s changed in executive recruitment

The executive landscape has changed in recent years. If you’re still approaching leadership recruitment the same way you did pre-COVID, you’re probably finding it harder to attract the right people, and the people you do hire aren’t having the impact you expected.

The numbers tell part of the story. The UK executive search market is expected to exceed £2.2 billion in 2025, representing steady growth year-on-year. But that growth masks some fundamental changes in how the market operates. The number of CEO’s leaving the UK’s largest companies has increased by between 16% and 50%, depending on industry sector, this year. Leaders are moving more frequently, being more selective about opportunities, and boards are making changes faster when things aren’t working.

Interestingly, although perhaps not-surprisingly, two-thirds of our search briefs this year have included some form of AI or data transformation requirement. Most businesses now recognise the need for leaders who can drive digital transformation while still delivering on traditional business fundamentals.

When you get the brief right you stop looking for someone with the right background and start looking for someone who can solve the right problems.

We worked with a FMCG brand to find a new commercial head. Five years ago, that brief would have focused on strategy, contracts, customers, and supplier relationships. This time, the conversation centred on how to integrate AI-driven demand forecasting with insights about customer behaviour, how to balance online and offline channel strategies, and how to build a commercial team that could operate effectively in what they called “hybrid reality”, part digital, part physical.

The successful candidate came from a completely different environment but had spent two years rebuilding their company’s commercial function around data analytics while preserving the relationship-driven approach that made her successful. They understood that using technology well enhances good commercial instincts; it doesn’t replace them.

Get the brief right to start

The biggest mistake I see in executive recruitment isn’t finding the wrong person, it’s about not being clear enough on what the right person needs to achieve. Most company job specifications read like a shopping list of qualifications and experience. The good ones tell a story about the difference the appointee will have, the achievements expected of them, and also what’s in it for the candidate.

There have been occasions in my career when it’s been difficult to get beyond the job description in a client briefing. It’s not unknown for some line managers and colleagues to reply with something along the lines of “we just want someone who will get the job done”. This isn’t helpful. When I started out in leadership recruitment, many years ago, I probably lacked the experience and knowledge to ask the right questions. Or have the confidence to challenge and really probe clients about the demands of the job and what would make a great candidate stand out.

Given that, there were some times in those days when a shortlist missed the mark. A few feedback discussions would reveal that candidates lacked something. But that “something” had never been mentioned in the briefing.

We saw how they adapted to family dynamics, how they communicated complex concepts to non-technical stakeholders, and how they handled pushback from people they couldn’t simply overrule.

I sometimes thought one had to be psychic to be a good recruiter. It helps, of course, but it’s not essential with the right briefing process. And the lesson of missing (or not revealing) key details was costly, but invaluable.

It’s something we talk about often: the hardest part of executive recruitment is not finding good talent, it’s coaxing the real information from clients before the search begins. When the true needs emerge only at the client interview stage, even the best process can’t deliver the right outcomes.

When you get the brief right you stop looking for someone with the right background and start looking for someone who can solve the right problems.

The assessment methods that actually predict success

Traditional interviews are surprisingly bad at predicting executive performance. We’ve seen too many leaders who interview brilliantly but struggle to deliver impact, and others who seem underwhelming in a formal interview setting but transform businesses.

We use psychometrics, personality questionnaires, and situational judgement tests in all search assignments. They contribute to understanding more about the potential behaviours, strengths and weaknesses, of candidates. But even with this insight it’s hard to predict how someone will approach the real-life demands of the job.

When appropriate, we create job simulations. These are structured exercises that mirror the real challenges someone will face in the role. They add to the data from questionnaires and impressions from interviews which, as we know, can be well-rehearsed and not always reflect reality.

As an example, for the final stage of a board level search for a family-owned business going through succession planning, we created a scenario where the candidates had to present a strategic plan to a room of family shareholders and independent board members with conflicting priorities and different levels of business sophistication. We saw how they adapted to family dynamics, how they communicated complex concepts to non-technical stakeholders, and how they handled pushback from people they couldn’t simply overrule.

A team with a good level of cognitive diversity approaches challenges from more angles, and that’s where the opportunity for real creativity kicks in.

The person who got the job wasn’t the most polished presenter or the one with the most impressive CV. That went to the one who instinctively understood that family businesses require a different kind of leadership: more collaborative, more patient, more focused on building consensus without losing decisiveness.

The importance of good references

In all our assignments we take references on the preferred candidate by telephone or Teams. Instead of asking standard questions about performance and character, we focus on specific situations that reflect the challenges our client, and the potential new leader, is facing. For the succession planning role mentioned above, we asked previous colleagues about times when the candidate had to bring about change in an environment where they didn’t have complete authority.

The referees’ answers provided a real indication of how the candidate built coalitions, how they dealt with resistance, and how they maintained momentum when progress was slow. This told us more about their suitability for working in a family business than any standard interview question could have.

Building diverse leadership teams that actually perform

Diversity in executive recruitment isn’t just about doing the right thing. It’s also about building leadership teams that can deal well with complexity, understand a range of issues, and make better decisions whe under pressure.

This is not about ensuring all the Belbin roles are covered or that there’s a mix of introverts and extraverts!

Teams with good cognitive diversity make better decisions, handle uncertainty with more agility, and create cultures where challenge is encouraged, not feared.

Most understand the value of traditional diversity measures (and of course, those matter: representation drives perspective, access, and fair process). But increasingly, the game-changer for boards and senior teams is cognitive diversity. Bringing together people who not only have different backgrounds, but who think, solve problems, and make decisions differently is a true competitive advantage.

A team with a good level of cognitive diversity will tackle challenges from multiple perspectives, and that’s where the opportunity for real creativity kicks in. For example, think of a senior leadership team wrestling with a complex strategic decision. If every member of the team went to the same kind of school, have similar career backgrounds, and have been recruited for “culture fit” they are likely to produce a narrow range of options.

We see this play out again and again. Diverse leadership teams are far less prone to groupthink. This is the term used when agreement becomes more important than honest debate, and alternative viewpoints quietly disappear. Artificial harmony is something I observe far too often in teams and is one of Pat Lencioni’s five dysfunctions.

Several years ago, I was with the chief executive of a highly successful UK brand who proudly told me that all of his board members and leadership team were ESTJs (one of the Myers Briggs personality types). The business had grown quickly and there was real focus and determination on competition and growth. But when the company faced a few challenges – some bad publicity and an economic downturn, it failed to respond effectively. The board lacked the creativity, breadth of experience and knowledge, and even the awareness to really understand the problems required to tackle the issues.

As a result, the business eventually failed, From shining star to oblivion, unnecessarily in my view.

When boards bring together a mix of personalities and thinking styles, ideas get challenged constructively and decisions are sharper. It’s the difference between giving in to consensus and genuinely considering the best way forward.

So, how can your test your the cognitive diversity of your team? One way is to use personality questionnaires to assess different styles and thinking approaches. A more practical method is to run a “decision mapping” exercise. Give the team a business scenario and ask each of them to outline their own thinking process and approach before sharing solutions. Do they approaching the problem with similar logic and assumptions? Or do you see a good mix of approaches – perhaps one with a data-first analysis, one with a more customer-centric focus, and a range of creative thinking, and “what if” questions?

The more styles and ideas you see, the more likely you have real cognitive diversity. And regularly changing things by asking team members to rotate roles and “wear different hats” in the board, – such as getting the finance director to see things from the sales director’s perspective or through inviting external advisors or observers – helps to expand the range of solutions the team creates.

Teams with good cognitive diversity make better decisions, handle uncertainty with more agility, and create cultures where challenge is encouraged, not feared. That’s what sets high-performing boards apart from the rest.

How interims can bridge the gaps

Sometimes the best executive recruitment strategy is admitting that you’re not ready for a permanent hire yet. Interim executives and managers have become a crucial part of the leadership landscape, now representing about 20% of executive appointments in the UK.

I worked with a global marketing services group that was going through a major restructuring in its finance function .The Group CFO knew they needed a different kind of Finance Director for the post-restructure business, but they weren’t entirely sure what that role should look like. Rather than hiring permanently based on incomplete information, we supplied an interim who had led many finance and systems transformations.

She spent six months mapping out the operational challenges of the new structure, identifying the skills and experience that would be crucial for long-term success, and actually implementing some of the foundational changes that would set up her permanent successor for success. When we eventually ran the permanent search, we had a much clearer picture of what good looked like, and the successful candidate was able to make quick progress in the role because the groundwork had already been laid.

Hiring an interim is best when dealing with transformation, succession planning, or any situation where the role requirements (or organisation’s needs) are likely to change quickly. It’s also an increasingly popular career choice for experienced leaders who thrive on the variety and challenge that interim projects provide.

Using AI to add to human experience

AI is transforming executive recruitment, but not in the way most people think. The real value isn’t in automated CV screening or algorithmic matching, it’s in providing experienced recruiters with better data and more efficient processes.

In bfpeople, we use AI tools to analyse market trends and salary benchmarks and to structure our assessment processes more effectively. We also use it to identify potential candidates who might not appear in obvious searches, But assessing whether someone can lead a team through complex change, build trust with stakeholders, or make difficult decisions under pressure… well that still requires human insight and experience.

The most useful application we’ve found is in mapping talent markets and identifying companies and individuals that even the most experienced human researchers might miss. In the search for a very specialised technical role, we were struggling with finding the skills and knowledge our client needed. Even the client’s staff couldn’t suggest more than a small number of industries and companies that might use the required skills.

Using AI, as early adopters at the time of this project, helped us to really broaden the search and speak to people we would not have found through more traditional research methods. This turned a tough project, where there was a very small pool of people, into a success, with another happy client.

How onboarding determines long-term success

Executive recruitment doesn’t end when someone accepts an offer. How you bring a new leader into the business has a massive impact on their long-term effectiveness and whether they’ll still be there in years or gone in months.

The best onboarding processes start before the first day of work. I encourage our clients to begin communication and start to share information with incoming leaders as soon as they’ve signed their contract. This isn’t to squeeze some free days of work out of them. And it’s not about asking them to make decisions on anything. Understanding the context and challenges they’ll be facing in the job helps them start their role with confidence and clarity.

The most effective onboarding processes also include clear expectations and success metrics for the first 100 days, six months, and first year. This isn’t about micromanaging and producing detailed project plans, but about agreeing what good looks like at different stages.

Using AI, as early adopters at the time of this project, helped us to really broaden the search and speak to people we would not have found through more traditional research methods.

For one recent project with an overseas-based business going through rapid expansion we arranged for the incoming leader to spend two days visiting international offices before their official start date. This gave the individual the opportunity to meet key stakeholders, and get a feel for how the business operated in different regions.

If you don’t speak to your incoming appointee between contract signing and start date, don’t be surprised if there’s a bumpy start and surprises in the first few months.

Timing is everything

When I was retained to find a managing director to grow a small interiors products business the client had fairly modest ambitions. The hope was to find someone to bring it back to profitability and double turnover. The company had underperformed for some years in a buoyant market and so money was tight. The salary range they had in mind was not at a level to attract the best talent.

In this situation I would often decline the assignment, but this was in an industry I and my firm know well – and I wanted to help this company to get out of their slump.

The pool of potential candidates for any search changes all the time. It really is all about timing: sometimes high-performers are ready and open for a new challenge, sometimes they are not.

In this instance the timing was perfect. One of the first people I approached was recognised as the most prominent sales-focused, leader in the industry. I didn’t expect them to be interested, but some dissatisfaction with their current situation, plus the opportunity to build something with a “challenger” business was intriguing.

Money was potentially going to be a problem as the candidate was earning considerably more than the range the client had in mind. But by talking to both parties openly and by helping the client to structure an innovative incentive scheme agreement was reached quite quickly.

It’s always risky to offer a shortlist of one to a client. But when trust exists between recruiter and client, and we have confidence that the candidate will transform the business, it can be the option to avoid indecision. The fixed fee we agreed with the client for the assignment, regardless of salary offered, gave the client confidence that I was negotiating the best deal for the client and candidate – and not that bfpeople would benefit from offering a significantly increased salary and package.

A few years in and the turnover of the company has more than quadrupled and profitability has soared. We have supported the recruitment of more commercial and design staff, and the business is an award-winning supplier in a highly competitive industry.

The best executive hires don’t just fill positions, they change how organisations think about what’s possible.

However, sometimes there is a dearth of good people who are interested in the opportunity. When an industry sector is booming, high performers are often well-looked after and well-rewarded for their work. They tend to be happier where they are and view a move to something new as more risky.

Two years ago I searched for five months for a technical director in a new technology area. Our mapping and research showed there were very few qualified and experienced individuals in this embryonic sector. Having approached all of them and many other people to enquire about recommendations, we failed to find anyone who both met my client’s criteria and was interested in a move at that time.

This is never a good situation to be in as a recruiter. But it happens. It’s important to keep the communications open with the client and to help them think about contingencies, which is exactly what I did. They found a short-term solution to their need internally and we agreed to pause the search.

I kept an eye on the market and the individuals we had approached. around six months later the timing was right and we quickly found three people who were both capable and interested. Timing is everything in recruitment.

What the future of executive recruitment looks like

Deep expertise in one industry sector is becoming less important or relevant. The most innovative solutions often come from leaders who bring perspectives from different sectors. We’re seeing more success with candidates who have solved similar problems in different contexts than with those who have deep experience in the same industry but haven’t faced comparable challenges.

Cultural fit is being redefined. Instead of looking for people who match the existing culture, forward-thinking organisations are hiring leaders who can evolve the culture while preserving what makes it effective. That requires a different kind of assessment – looking for culture builders rather than culture followers.

Speed and quality don’t have to be mutually exclusive. The best executive recruitment processes are both fast and thorough. That comes from being clear about what you’re looking for, having efficient assessment methods, and making decisions based on evidence rather than consensus. However, it’s better to hire right than hire fast.

Candidates complain on LinkedIn about lengthy interview processes, but I argue that it is crucial to get multiple perspectives for both candidate and client. If that takes three interview sessions (or more) then so be it.

The businesses that get executive recruitment right in 2025 and beyond will be those that understand it’s not about finding perfect candidates, it’s about finding the right leaders for their specific challenges at their specific moment. That requires clarity about what success looks like, creativity in where you look for talent, and the confidence to make decisions based on potential rather than just past performance.

The difference between adequate and exceptional executive recruitment often comes down to asking better questions: not just “can this person do the job?” but “what positive difference can this person make to our business and the challenges we’re facing?”

The best executive hires don’t just fill positions, they change how organisations think about what’s possible.

If you are planning your next leadership appointments contact me to learn about the bfpeople difference.