With the economy heading south and no proven sighting of those much vaunted green shoots, it might not be the most obvious time for headhunters to go a-scalping but, perhaps surprisingly, demand for top-notch CIOs continues apace. Indeed, some believe that with offshoring, cost-cutting and consolidation changing the face of IT operations - and with technology the only game in town for those companies seeking to transform themselves - the best IT chiefs will be more in demand than ever. With this in mind, we spoke to leading headhunters about what they're looking for.
Click here to read part one, What are headhunters looking for?
Tim Cook
Executive director and CIO specialist at Russell Reynolds
Do you use LinkedIn?
We don't do LinkedIn! I've never found anyone using it. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's not how we work. We are retained by a client, and we don't work on commission, so we aren't driven by that.
We have a long-term objective. We source into the market and end up knowing lots of people and how companies work. We know who we can go to for unbiasedad advice and can ask, for example, who has got a good reputation for, say, SAP projects.
On the other hand, we can ask the client the best questions on the structure of the organisation, and the way the role of CIO is organised, because we have a knowledge of the company. Then we can find a group of likely people, and present them to the client.
Before we do that, however, we'll have spent a lot of time with the client, got under the skin of the brief, found out what the team is like, what the boss is like and what's the real scope of the job. Then we interview the candidates.
Do you have the same suspicion of CVs?
A CV is a sales document. The job of a search firm is to get under the skin of that, whereas a recruitment firm will be more motivated to push the sales documents version of events.
Obviously, not everyone tells the full truth on their CV so we look for evidence of specific competency. For example, we'll ask how did you deliver [on the claim made on your CV], how did you lead people, how influential were you? You can only get a true feel for that information if you spend time with people. The focus is on how you achieved things, as we have to make a case to the client as to why we chose you.
So strengths and weaknesses are laid bare?
Yes, we'll say to the client, say, Bill is good on delivering, whereas Mary is strong on team building, whereas Mike could use support in these areas and is less tactical, but brilliant on influencing the board and getting the job done.
When you're explaining your strengths and weaknesses, you need to think [about] what are the best anecdotes to exemplify your argument. If you end up using an example off the top of your head, it might not be your best one, and you need to get your strongest material clear in your mind. You need to be on top of your CV and clear about how you achieved these goals.
Be the first to comment on this article!