Why Headhunters Fail and What to Do About It
January 06, 2021
by Krista Bradford

 Why Headhunters Fail

Most traditional retained search headhunters are not candidate sourcing or recruiting research experts. Headhunters would rather focus on “more important” things like reeling in the next client. There’s a reason. Headhunter compensation is closely tied to how much business they bring in. So search firms hire retained search partners who are strong in sales. Headhunters are rarely research experts.  And, in the Age of Information, that’s a problem. The lack of research expertise causes executive search to fail.

Executive headhunters often delegate recruiting research to someone else. That someone else is usually a secretary or junior associate right of college. That’s why most search firm “researchers” lack serious research expertise. Lacking expertise, they don’t know how to find the best candidates. As a result, headhunters fail.

How do we know this? When headhunters hit the wall, their client companies come to us for help. (See How to Crush Candidate Sourcing.) We have witnessed the work of the headhunters who have come before us. It isn’t pretty. In every failed search, the recruiting research was haphazard. We’ve seen the existing lists of potential candidates that failed to produce a hire. The executive mapping was riddled with holes. The candidate sourcing lacked discipline. Worse, in every instance, headhunters missed top candidates standing in plain sight.


The Rise of Anarchy in Candidate Data

There’s been an explosion of data on candidates, companies, and industries. The data are scattered like buckshot across the Internet. Information about passive candidates is tucked away in a myriad of databases. The information is not visible to search engines. Headhunters cannot simply google it. The information lies hidden deep within the Invisible Web.

Over the past 10 years, the amount of digital data has increased from 1,200 to 59,000 exabytes (EB). And this number is predicted to grow at increasingly larger rates. By 2025, the IDC predicts that we will have 175,000 EB, or 175 zettabytes (ZB) of digital data. The amount of data predicted to be created over the next three years will be more than what has been created in the last 30 years. As early as 2012, Michael Walker, the Managing Partner of Rose Business Technologies, was able to describe what we’re witnessing today as the Rise of Data Anarchy.

The image shows the exponential growth of digital data by region. The figure predicts that China will account for neearly a fourth of all digital data in 2025.  The UNited Staes in predicted to account for roughly one fifth of all digital data in 2025.

Image from Forbes, November 2018

Data is the Forest: Candidates are the Trees

It is counter-intuitive. But the more candidate information there is, the harder executive search becomes. Headhunters lack the skills needed to separate the signal from the noise.  In fact, most search firms have not altered their processes in more than half a century. They simply have not dealt with the rising tide of information.

Most headhunters cannot see the forest for the trees. Yes, amazing executives are but a Google search or a LinkedIn connection away.  But the sheer volume of names is a problem. Too many wrong candidates get in the way of those who are right. Moreover, we live in an age of data chaos. Unstructured data lacks context. You don’t know how many potential candidates there are at target companies. Consequently, you don’t know when you can stop trying to find them. That lack of perspective dumbs down recruiting, making it more costly and less effective. (To learn how to bring order to data chaos, check out The Definitive Guide to Org Charts.)

Even after your headhunters have developed a long list of executives for a search, they are not candidates — at least not yet. The heaving lifting of “candidate development” remains. You must still determine whether a prospective candidate is qualified, interested, able to relocate, and, yes, sane. In other words, you cannot download a list of the best candidates, at least not yet But gifted recruitment researchers can produce such a list.


Headhunters Need to Reach Beyond Typical Recruiting Data

There is treasure to be found in the mountain of data. The information extends far beyond typical recruiting databases and social networks. Think “Nate Silver”. Or think “Peter Brand”, played by Jonah Hill in the movie Moneyball. They make a compelling case for leveraging information to make recruiting smarter.

Consider what data might tell you who the best candidates are. Baseball has batting averages that measure performance. Every industry has its own statistics. Every industry has RBIs (Runs Batted In) and ERAs (Earned Run Averages). Crunched in the right way, those statistics can lead to incredible game-changing hires.


What to Do About It

So next time you need an executive headhunter, you for a nerdy search practice with data expertise. Alternatively, partner with a recruiting research firm that enables you to harness the power of data. Yes, subscribe to software and services that leverage artificial intelligence and people analytics. But your work does not end there. You still need search partners that know how to think about the data. Headhunters that lack that expertise are set up to fail.  Seek search firms and research firms who are proponents of smarter search.

For more, check out our Eye-Opening Executive Search Research Video.


Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed our post, please show the love and share it with your friends by clicking the buttons below. It makes it easier for others to find the post.

Headhunters | Why They Fail and What to Do About It is highly popular post having 6 Buffer shares
Share with your friends
Powered by ESSB
Send this to a friend