How Executive Recruiters Maintain Secrecy

When a company is looking to replace an existing member of its c-suite — which means it’s about to push out the person in the job right now — the process of recruiting the replacement must take place in total secrecy. Discretion is necessary for several reasons. First, if the executive finds out, he or she may become disengaged, and might even poison the waters for whoever the replacement is. Also, research shows that when executives are told, they often try to influence the selection process in a way that could cement their personal legacy rather than going by what’s best for the company. The secrecy is sometimes necessary to protect the company in the marketplace as well. When competitors learn that an organization is dissatisfied with part of its operation, they sometimes use that knowledge to their advantage, probing for weaknesses they can exploit. And when a search takes months — which a thorough one often does — competitors may suggest the organization is having trouble filling the post. If the rumor mill really starts spinning, people might believe the business must have all sorts of problems, preventing top-tier candidates from wanting to join. Keeping an executive search covert can be very difficult. As president of an executive search firm, I speak not only with potential candidates, but also with people who are familiar with their work. I also coordinate with multiple leaders inside the organization who are part of the selection process. Any one of the people I speak with may have a personal relationship with the executive who is to be replaced, and could fill him or her in. Or they might mention it to someone else, such as a family member, who then tells someone else, and so on. In today’s interconnected world, it’s especially difficult to protect business secrets. Case in point: J.K. Rowling was unmasked as the author using the pseudonym Robert Galbraith after a lawyer divulged the information to his wife’s best friend, who then shared it on Twitter. Successfully conducting a confidential search means going to extreme lengths to try to ensure this never happens. I’ve had executives hire me to find replacements for some of their direct reports while, unbeknownst to these same executives, I was in the process of finding their replacement. I have been at dinners where I was coincidentally in the process of finding a replacement for a fellow guest. (I couldn’t cancel, because doing so could trigger suspicion. I also couldn’t avoid normal conversation, such as asking this person how things are at work.) When it’s time for a company to interview the short-listed candidates I’ve found for them, I have the selection committee join me stealthily at a hotel conference room. Even there, we instruct the hotel to not post the meeting participants or companies involved. And we typically schedule these meetings using fake names. Here are some of the other tactics it takes to keep these types of searches a secret. Avoid specifics. When I reach out to sources within an industry for recommendations on who the best candidates may be, I often don’t disclose the company I’m working for or the job title it’s looking to fill. Instead, we talk about leadership competencies. For example, I’ll say, “I’m looking for candidates who excel at people leadership, demonstrate a strong drive for results, and possess an inherently collaborative spirit in building relationships. Who has that combination?” When I begin speaking with potential candidates, a similar rule applies. At first, I don’t tell them the firm I am representing. Instead, I explain what the industry is, and that the role would be at their current level or above, while also ascertaining their own ambitions. This allows me to develop a preliminary view of their candidacy without divulging anything that my client isn’t prepared to convey to the market. Use bulletproof NDAs. Non-disclosure agreements may be “out of control” in how employers are using them with their employees, but in an executive search process that has to remain confidential, they’re essential. Some standard NDAs are inadequate. To make them more enforceable, they need to include clear restrictions establishing that all the information to be shared is confidential, from the company name to the incumbent to compensation. Limit the search committee size. No more than four people inside the company should be aware of and involved in the selection process. I’ve found that this size is manageable and helps limit the possibility of any leaks, while also allowing for a diversity of perspectives on each candidate. But all of them must be people who genuinely agree that the executive needs to be replaced. Keep it off email — with one exception. Email mistakes are far too easy to make. A member of the search committee could send a message to the wrong person, or forward it to someone else, or leave it up on their screen for passers-by to see. There must be no emailing about the process at all. There is one exception, however. The members of the committee receive reports from me, with rigorous, competency-based assessments on the candidates with whom they’re going to meet. They need to be able to access these documents online. So I use password-protected reports. The emails that accompany these do not indicate what they’re about. Of course, people are fallible, so there’s no such thing as a 100% foolproof plan for a confidential search. But I’ve found that when these steps are followed, leaks are much less likely — and the company much more protected. Recognizing why recruiters need to keep secrets — and some of the techniques we use for doing so — can be helpful for candidates, too. Some of the things we ask you to do (such as giving a fake name at the front desk of a hotel) may seem silly, but when a company is going to make a high-level executive change, confidentiality is a must.

How Executive Recruiters Maintain Secrecy

Summary.

Partner Center