Dear Reader,
Last week, I wrote about some of the hardest people decisions CEOs face once someone is already in the organisation.
This week, I want to look at what happens before they get there.
Hiring is one of the hardest parts of leadership.
It is also something I think many organisations make more complicated than it needs to be.
First, accept that you will sometimes get it wrong
If there is one conversation I still have with almost every CEO I support, it is hiring.
“We made a bad hire.”
“I should have spotted it.”
“Did I miss the warning signs?”
“Was I too focused on experience and not fit?”
Hiring carries a huge amount of emotion. As leaders, we often feel that getting it wrong reflects on us.
But there is no foolproof hiring process.
What matters is whether we learn from every decision.
When a hire doesn't work out, I encourage leaders to do an after action review.
Could you realistically have spotted the warning signs earlier?
Was the process rigorous enough?
Were you hiring for today's needs or tomorrow's?
Did references tell the full story?
Were expectations clear on both sides?
Sometimes there was something you should have done differently.
Sometimes it simply wasn't the right fit, despite everyone acting in good faith.
Know the difference, learn what you can, and consider changing the process next time.
Do more than check the references you've been given
For senior hires particularly, organisations need to do their homework.
I've always been surprised by how rarely organisations go beyond formal references.
Some of my best hiring decisions were strengthened by conversations with people who had actually worked with a candidate.
In one case, a candidate had been very open about why a previous role hadn't worked. What I subsequently heard completely corroborated their account. Their honesty actually increased my confidence in hiring them.
In another, questions emerged that we discussed openly. We agreed to start with a six month contract. It became a successful long term appointment.
And in one memorable case, a CEO contacted me after hearing I had hired one of their former employees and told me there had been a fraud issue.
It made me seriously question how our reference process had missed something so significant.
Of course, informal references need to be treated carefully. People have biases. Relationships go wrong. Context matters. Candidates need the opportunity to respond.
But:
Formal references can tell you what someone did. The conversations around them can help you understand how, why and in what context.
Stop automatically replacing people
Someone resigns.
A job description comes out of a drawer.
Recruitment begins.
But that can be a missed opportunity.
Every departure gives you permission to ask:
What does this organisation actually need next?
The organisations I work with are often scaling, changing funding models, rethinking strategy or entering a new stage of growth.
Their organisation structures shouldn't remain static while everything around them changes.
Sometimes you need to reshape several roles rather than replace one.
Sometimes you need an entirely new capability.
Sometimes the best answer is promoting someone internally and hiring underneath them.
So before automatically replacing someone, ask:
If we were designing the organisation from scratch today, would we create this role in the same way?
And stop trying to eliminate all hiring risk
I recently read a Korn Ferry article, 6 Rounds, No Offer, which cited Indeed data showing that between late 2022 and November 2025, the average time from posting a job to making a hire had increased by more than 65%, from 29 days to 48 days.
Some of that reflects understandable caution.
But I wonder how much reflects our attempts to eliminate risk.
Another interview.
Another panel.
Another assessment.
Another round.
For senior roles, you absolutely need enough time to get to know each other properly. Let candidates meet colleagues. See how they interact. Spend less formal time together where possible.
But eventually, another interview stops giving you useful information and simply delays the decision.
That's also why I like interim appointments, acting opportunities, fractional leaders and fixed term contracts in the right circumstances.
Rather than trying to predict everything through interviews, sometimes you can create an opportunity to learn together.
The goal isn't certainty
No process will guarantee the right hire.
For me, the goal is to gather enough evidence to make a thoughtful decision, be clear about what you need, and then give someone the conditions to succeed once they arrive.
So if you're hiring at the moment, I would ask yourself three things:
Are we hiring for the organisation we have today, or the one we're becoming?
What evidence do we actually need to make this decision?
And what are we going to learn from the next stage of the process that we don't already know?
If you don't have a good answer to that last question, perhaps you don't need another interview.
Warmly,
Liz
Strategic Advisor | Former CEO | Founder, Volante
Based in Kenya, available globally
