How can you screen executive search candidates for red flags?

Job gaps is not a problem life happens eg lot of companies are restructuring and people are being retrenched, some they are looking for someone who can give them an opportunity. But someone who is a job hooper is a red flag.

This first step is to establish what a red flag is in the eyes of the company that's hiring. What may seem like a red flag to Company A might not be one for Company B. Let's take an extended career break, say 12 months. Company A may see this as a red flag because they hired candidates with career breaks before, and it didn't work out. Employees found it difficult to re-integrate into a workplace routine, adapt, perform and ultimately contribute. Company B may not see this as a red flag because they have positive experience hiring people with career breaks and also see value. They may consider such a candidate well-rested and full of energy versus one who steps from one company right into the next.

Resume gaps are common. It depends on the position and on the industry. Those in high-tech/IT tend to jump around more than in other positions. Life happens and gaps can be completely fine. People suffer from burn-out, or want to take time away to be with family or travel. All these things give more perspective into character and also perhaps job fit. There are employers that respect someone for knowing that they needed to take a break before committing to a new job.

When evaluating executive candidates, I ask for examples of the below as an effective 'green' and 'red' flag finder. 'When have you...' - Led through a transformational business change (accountability, initiative, communication & leadership style, external vs internal locus of control) - Brought out the best in another person and mentored effectively (authenticity, EQ, leadership capacity, team work) - Had a long term impact on a business that you're proud of (creativity, commercial thinking, long term orientation) - Experienced failure, a setback or a humbling experience (resilience, learning agility) - Taken inspiration from a mentor, leader, or colleague (network, curiosity, continuous improvement)

When screening executive search candidates for red flags, it's essential to carefully review their professional background, including their job history, achievements, and references. Look for inconsistencies or gaps in their resume, as well as any negative patterns such as frequent job changes or abrupt departures. Additionally, pay attention to their communication style and demeanor during interviews for any signs of dishonesty or lack of transparency. Conduct thorough reference checks to validate their qualifications and ensure they have a track record of success and integrity in their previous roles. Lastly, trust your instincts and consider any gut feelings or intuition you may have about the candidate's suitability for the position.

While working on executive projects, I found three key takeaways to uncover red flags while interviewing executives: 1. Ask for examples, search for real-time situations to reveal how they work and discover what their leadership style is; 2. What was their thinking process, and how do they make their important decisions; 3. Why they left previous organisations is often revealing lots of information about, what they like, and what triggers them;

It's our job to find out the stories behind candidate's resumes when it comes to career gaps and inconsistencies. Things happen and we shouldn't simply red-flag candidates based on their resumes.

Too Much Job Hopping: While some movement is expected in today’s business environment, excessive job changes should raise concerns. Frequent transitions may indicate ineffective performance or other issues. Less Than Stellar References: Pay attention to the type and quality of references provided by the candidate. If an executive candidate’s references are not glowing, it’s a cause for concern. Communication Skills: Executives need to be excellent communicators. If a candidate fails to impress with their communication skills, it may affect their ability to guide and connect with the team effectively. Overconfidence: Confidence is essential, but Executives with excessive overconfidence may struggle to fit into a healthy company culture.

I approach reference checks in the same way I conduct interviews: I ask behavior-based questions to references that uncover insights into qualities like humility, thoughtful leadership, emotional intelligence, cultural alignment, adaptability, and creative problem-solving. By probing for specific examples in these areas, you can better assess a candidate's suitability for leadership roles within your organization.

Some times when checking references you need to go about it differently than the status quo. Ask outside the box questions to see if this person actually worked with candidate or is just buddy. Sometimes it’s limited what you can ask but I like to ask specifics and see what the reference lets me know. A good reference for the candidate is someone who limits their communication and a good one for our company is someone who overshares which can do record and bad things for candidate.

When evaluating feedback and references, it's crucial to discern between isolated incidents and patterns of behavior. A single negative comment may not be as concerning as consistent reports of problematic behavior. Additionally, context matters; a skill gap in one role could be irrelevant in another. Therefore, it's important to weigh the relevance of the feedback to the role in question. Cross-referencing feedback with behavioral interviews and assessments can provide a more comprehensive view of the candidate's fit.

References provide valuable insights, but a common challenge is that candidates often list references they know will give positive feedback. For executives, I prefer one-on-one references over written ones. In a one-on-one setting, whether virtual or in-person, a trained recruiter can not only listen to what is being said but also pick up on what is NOT being said. By probing referees on specific areas, recruiters can gain deep insights that help contextualize a candidate's strengths and potential shortcomings.

While negative feedback should be carefully evaluated, it's also important to consider the source and context of the information. In some cases, personal biases or conflicts of interest may influence the feedback provided. Therefore, it's crucial to gather multiple perspectives and look for consistent patterns or themes across different references.

When evaluating a candidate, feedback and references from previous employers, colleagues, clients, or mentors are crucial indicators. Seek honest opinions regarding the candidate's strengths, weaknesses, achievements, challenges, and behaviors. Red flags such as poor communication skills, low emotional intelligence, unethical conduct, or unresolved conflicts may surface. These could signify shortcomings in leadership, teamwork, or problem-solving abilities. It's essential to delve deeper into negative feedback and references, cross-referencing them with other sources for a comprehensive evaluation.

If multiple references or sources provide consistent negative feedback about a candidate's performance, behavior, or work ethic, it's essential to take these concerns seriously and explore them further. we have to specify Feedback as Negative feedback that is vague or lacks specific examples may be less credible than feedback that provides concrete instances or details of the candidate's shortcomings or challenges.

This is all about evidence-based feedback, rather than personal opinions. Your approach should facilitate feedback with reference to work-based examples of the behaviours you're seeking to test. With strategic hiring, consider the different perspectives you want to collect: this might include colleagues/peers, less and more experienced colleagues (360 feedback style where it can be gained) and from clients and/or suppliers too.

If you are hiring an executive, you might consider checking references from a direct manager and from any direct reports as well. These provide you with different perspectives based on what you are hiring or potentially hiring this person for. I think its also key to note, if someone provides a reference and the overall feedback is more constructive than positive, ask follow up questions to understand how this effected this persons ability to do their work. A good indicator at the end of a reference call is also if this person would rehire or work with this person again. If the answer is yes but perhaps in a better role, its not necessarily a bad reference. If the answer is a flat out 'no', thats a red flag.

Behavioral and situational interview questions allow you to learn how the candidate operates in different types of situations. I believe this is truly the most effective way to learn a candidates work style and capabilities as it relates to soft skills. These types of questions can be found online and can be catered to the specific position you are hiring for.

For Director levels and above, I take a 2 step approach. Step one is to have a general conversation and not a screen. We discuss about the company and why the role is open. Give high level overview. Then discuss candidate future his/her aspirations. If there is agreement to move further, we move to detailed interview. Step 2 is the more detailed interview. Usually in step 1 we can make decisions to move forward or not.

Hiring the right executives can greatly impact employee morale, company culture, and the future of the organization. The executive hiring team should carefully consider "what to ask", as asking the right questions reveals a lot about a candidate's leadership style and problem-solving skills. According to Harvard Business Review, 82% of failed leadership appointments are due to a poor fit with company culture or inability to meet performance expectations. That's a huge factor! Designing a thorough hiring process, while incorporating the right behavioral, situational and performance based questions is essential.

Behavioral and situational interview questions helps to check candidates behavior's in different environment. Additionally, can help to evaluate the attitude, emotional intelligence and critical thinking. Sometimes there are people who are technically very sound but when it comes to soft skills then they lacks the right attitude and behavior. So it is important to ask questions related to their problem solving, team player, self driven skills with real life examples which will help a recruiter to onboard a candidate who will be culturally fit and can deal with a client in different situations easily.

To effectively screen for red flags in executive search candidates, I use behavioral and situational questions that delve into their past experiences with decision-making, leadership, and problem-solving. I look for inconsistencies, lack of accountability, or a mismatch with the company's values in their responses.

Spotting red flags in executive candidates demands attention to the energy they project. Prepare questions within a storytelling framework to obtain behavioral insights. Executives have significant influence on company culture, a misalignment can completely disrupt the entire organization. Storytelling unveils values, work ethic, and alignment with the company's mission and vision. If their energy feels off, it's a sign of a poor cultural fit/add

1. Verify resume accuracy and check for gaps. 2. Contact references for performance feedback. 3. Assess online presence for professionalism. 4. Conduct behavioral interviews to reveal red flags. 5. Perform thorough background checks. 6. Use assessment tests to evaluate skills and traits. 7. Ensure cultural fit with your organization. 8. Watch for warning signs like frequent job changes or ethical issues.

Evaluate the candidate based on his or her responses during conversation rather than their resume because the responses are real-time and are usually an honest reflection of their competencies and knowledge of the field. The best executives exhibit high levels of EQ and can clearly communicate their role in helping the company grow or avert disasters during their tenure.

Personally, I prefer to have a casual conversation with the candidate and ask a few behavioural and situational questions to learn more about their problem-solving abilities and alignment with the company's values/vision.

I am a firm believer that past behavior predicts future success. Behavioral questions formed around key competencies and the organizations needs are a great starting point. Always probing for details, we are looking for consistencies/inconsistencies, providing concrete examples, direct responses. It is also important to have multiple touch points with the candidate in interview and casual settings where you are able to make a better assessment in areas such as cultural fit with the organization.

While behavioral assessments offer valuable insights, they have limitations. They provide a snapshot of a candidate's behavior at a specific point in time and may not capture the full complexity of their personality or capabilities. Additionally, candidates may attempt to manipulate their responses to align with perceived organizational expectations, leading to inaccuracies in the assessment results. To mitigate these challenges, it's essential to complement behavioral assessments with other evaluation methods, such as behavioral questioning and body language reading. By combining these 3 tactics, you can get a better feel for how the candidate functions on a regular basis and within a team.

I find Personality assessments very useful and mostly a true reflection of whether a candidate is a good fit but the tests that i use also measure consistency so it's easy to see if someone answered truthfully or tried to skew the responses to make their results favorable. Also, If tests are done prior to the formal interview then you also get a chance to ask relevant situational/ behavioral questions that usually validate/ clarify the results.

Personality tests or psychometric tests help us to check whether candidate will be culturally fit or not. It should be part of recruitment process for sure, as provide insights into the candidate's behavioral tendencies and personality traits. It can help employers to assess a candidate's suitability for a particular role or work environment, and to identify potential strengths and weaknesses. Also help to identify the red flags, such as a tendency towards impulsivity or a lack of emotional intelligence, ability to handle stress and pressure.

Incorporate personality and cognitive assessments to gain deeper insights into candidates' traits, capabilities, and potential fit for the role and org. Utilise standard tests or customized assessments tailored to the position's requirements. Analyse results to identify strengths, weaknesses, and compatibility with team dynamics. However, remember to interpret findings cautiously, considering cultural and individual differences. Use assessments as supplementary tools in conjunction with other evaluation methods for a comprehensive candidate assessment.

There are some useful tools to help identify an individual's working style, preferences and optimum communication methods but I find these better as an onboarding support rather than an assessment tool. I share others' reservations that some of these assessments can be too broad or open to interpretation, which for senior strategic hires isn't really appropriate. Instead I would suggest planning interview and team involvement during the hiring process which gives you a view of the candidate/s in a range of situations - including 1:1, team & task based, presenting and negotiating challenge.

I share similar sentiments as the others who have commented. These tests should not be used to determine if someone is a fit for the leadership/executive role, but can be used to help you understand this person more deeply and prepare to set them up for success at your company. I would not deem this a reasonable means of assessing a candidate's fit for a role.

In my experience, psychometric tools that are valid and reliable offer an objective view of a candidate. When these tools are grounded in scientific principles, they do reveal insights that may not be immediately apparent to an interviewer. Use the results to delve deeper into a candidate's mindset, gaining insights into their self-awareness, perspectives, and developmental journey over time. An executive who is not aware of their shortcomings and how their strengths are aligned to the role would require more time to deliver optimally compared to a more selfaware candidate who also matches the role requirements.

Ich finde gewisse Tests bzw. zuverlässige Tools anzuwenden (je nach zu besetzender Stelle) sinnvoll. Aber, wir sollten uns nicht nur darauf verlassen, das Bauchgefühl und unsere eigene Erfahrung sollte immer noch maßgeblich zur Entscheidung beitragen und Tests und Tools sollten diese unterstützen.

These tools can create areas to probe, to talk about, in case there are any flags that appear. They are never 100% reflective of the person's personality and results can vary each time one takes the assessment. It's important to get the person's opinion on how effect the assessment was, by showing them the results.

Personality and cognitive assessments are tools used in the hiring process to evaluate a candidate's traits, behaviors, and cognitive abilities. These assessments provide valuable insights into a candidate's personality profile, decision-making skills, and potential fit for the role and organizational culture.

As a recruiter, I was trained to scrutinize job gaps and reasons for leaving previous positions. Nowadays, we also examine a candidate's online presence, from their content to the groups they join. However, not everyone is a social butterfly, and I believe that participation at work and impact made with managers and peers are equally important and speaks volumes. Let's remember to look beyond social media and assess candidates holistically. #recruitingtips #jobsearch #careeradvice

Online presence and reputation refer to an individual's or organization's visibility and perception on the internet, including social media profiles, professional networking sites, and online reviews. Managing and maintaining a positive online presence is essential for building credibility, attracting opportunities, and shaping public perception.

Although a candidate's online presence, including their social media profiles and professional networking site can provide insight into their professionalism and how they present themselves professionally to the public, recruiters should be mindful in approaching the online research ethically and responsibly. It is essential that the focus is only on job-related information and avoid any discriminatory or biased judgments based on personal characteristics.

As far as online I do believe this is very subjective and it cannot be used to rule in or out a candidate. I do think it can be used if the person is active to understand their personal contributions to their profession. I do think the complete lack of an online presence may hint to a person's willingness to learn or explore new things and engage a variety of audiences/generations. This can be weaved in by asking if they have a professional social media handle such as LinkedIn that they wish to share etc. Ensure the recruiter has researched and prepared questions prior to interviewing the potential candidate.

Evaluating a candidate's online presence and reputation is increasingly important in today's digital age. Here are key considerations when assessing an individual's online profile: 1: LinkedIn Profile: Completeness: A well-crafted LinkedIn profile with detailed information about the candidate's professional background, achievements, and endorsements. Connections: The number and quality of professional connections can provide insights into the candidate's network and industry engagement. Other Professional Networks: 2. Presence on Industry-Specific Platforms: Depending on the industry, assess the candidate's involvement in relevant professional networks beyond LinkedIn. 3. Public Social Media Profiles: Check Appropriateness & Content

Online reputation is increasing as an important selection factor. Especially for roles with high external visibility in companies (C Level, Head of Communication, Head of Sales etc.). It will get more important in the future but we should be careful as candidates can create an outward story not matching day by day in their internal roles and behaviour. Here again references might help to complete the picture.

A candidate's online presence, including their social media profiles, personal website, and professional networking accounts (such as LinkedIn), should reflect professionalism and consistency with their personal brand. This includes having a professional profile photo, a well-written bio or summary, and content that aligns with their career goals and industry interests.

Ich finde insbesondere auf den beruflichen Netzwerken kann man sehr gut auch berufliche Beiträge ansehen, die für mich relevant sind. Auch kann ich dort sehen (wenn der Kandidat oder die Kandidatin aktiv sind) wie im beruflichen Kontext argumentiert wird, welche Haltung zu erkennen ist etc.

There are people that have extensive online profiles and contributions, and there are people that don't. I do, however, use things like LinkedIn to corroborate their resume. It's amazing how someone might exaggerate their roles on a resume (targeted at a select audience) than where it's public and open for review by their peers and past employers. Some won't link themselves the company's web page just to stay under the radar. As with answers, you are looking for consistency with the information.

Improved Candidate Quality: By understanding what the client is truly looking for in a role and candidate, recruiters can source and present candidates who closely align with those requirements. This leads to a higher quality candidate pool, reducing the need for rejections. Enhanced Client Relationships: Regular communication fosters trust and transparency between recruiters and clients. Clients appreciate being kept informed about the progress of their recruitment efforts, including updates on candidate submissions, feedback from interviews, and any challenges encountered along the way. Strong client relationships are essential for long-term success in the recruitment industry.

Executives help the CEO to create the company's vision and make sure the necessary resources are available to achieve that vision. Executives are responsible for clearing obstacles and making sure the company's goals are achieved. It's important to find people who are not afraid to challenge the status quo and drive change. They should be able to manage their departments and contribute to the company's success. To find a suitable executive, observe how , who, what they spend their free time. This can give you an idea of their character, values, and priorities. You can learn more about their leadership style and if they will fit in the organization by watching how they interact with others and what they do during their leisure time.

Always focus on stakeholder expectation. Discuss with them about their requirement, work on negative feedback so that we can do better screening. Then it will be easy to get the right candidate.

An executive hire is an expensive hire , not just the salary, and not just recruiting fees. It’s expensive because there is a lot riding on this hire’s success’s. This new hire will influence company strategy and impact everyone below them. Making a hiring mistake can result in lost revenue and turnover. My biggest advice is to take your time! Take the time to get alignment of the stakeholders, alignment on what is most critical for the role, alignment on the desired outcomes, and even on the hiring process. Take the time to recruit a diverse candidate pool, don’t just go with the first referral your CEO has. Take your time getting to know your candidate, and letting them get to know you. This is a huge investment, don’t be hasty.

Candidates should be polite and professional while speaking to recruiters. Some candidates are rude, and it's important not to proceed with those candidates just for the sake of closure. Additionally, if a candidate declines an offer, it's important to communicate clearly that they will not be considered for future opportunities with the organization. Nowadays, candidates don't understand the value of the time and resources invested in the interview process, so it's important to set clear expectations.

Trust your instincts, if something feels off or odd during the screening process, that may be a signal to dig deeper. Don’t shy away from having a straightforward conversation to better understand someone’s career progression. When submitting an executive candidate both of your professional reputations are being presented

How about trusting your gut? Trusting your gut means paying attention to non-verbal cues, consistency, and intuition during interactions. It helps uncover subtle red flags missed by formal assessments but it should be balanced with evidence and avoided biases.

Evaluating an executive professional begins right from the first call, where the recruiter can gauge various aspects: -Assess if they willingly explain their work and provide clear insights into their experiences. -Observe how the professional responds and articulates their thoughts. -If the professional seems unprepared or unaware of their own accomplishments. -An unwillingness to receive or discuss constructive feedback may indicate rigidity.

Being a leadership recruiter, I would look at the growth stint of a leadership candidate. In my view, constant growth within stipulated time is considered as a green flag. However, if a leadership candidate had been in an organisation for a longer period of time and was unable to make a shift to a higher level, then it will be considered as a major RED flag. This usually happens due to poor or average performance as every organization looks for good growth. Hiring a good leader from the market is the toughest part just because their current organization will never let them leave and would rather retain them to stay and grow their business.

- Reviewing resumes, cover letters, and references can provide valuable insights into a candidate’s qualifications, experience, and suitability for the position. - Before the actual interview, conducting a thorough pre-interview screening can help identify potential red flags early on. Adding comments against incomplete/missing information like career gaps, job changes, education qualifications, passing year and personal details. - Asking right questions to a candidate basis the role requirement and then reverify it with the details they have provided in their resume will help draw parallel around the authenticity of information on their resume.

The hiring elite typically overlooks a small detail: how to choose the "perfect" candidate is often still a mystery. I make this modest recommendation as a PhD candidate going through the deep depths of the hiring process: maybe a total redesign of the process is in order. (Un)doubtedly, it is critical to have a more comprehensive grasp of a candidate's, er, whole life narrative and prior actions? The question is: what are you looking for? A carbon copy from a former employee, a competent professional, or someone who fits with your culture? After all, wouldn't it be awful to pass up a wonderful fit because of—gasp—erroneous assumptions?

I find sharing specific instances about a previous role from past really is telling for me. If they are going over a certain achievement they accomplished and they sound super passionate I think it just tells a lot of the person and helps me probe more!

My #1 question for executives on any topic is: Describe what that would look like. If they have been successful with company culture, establishing organizational goals and objectives. They should be able to articulate what it looks like from their experience at other organizations.