Some searches begin with a clearly defined vacancy.
The company knows what the previous person did, what worked, what did not work and what the next person needs to accomplish.
Other searches begin with a much less certain statement:
“We think we need someone who can…”
That often happens when a company is entering a new market, opening or expanding a facility, introducing a product line, formalizing a business function or reaching a level of growth that requires new leadership capabilities.
It may know the business result it wants, but not the exact title, background or type of person required to produce it.
That is not a problem.
The problem comes when the organization tries to create certainty too quickly by writing a job description before fully defining the need.
Start with the business problem
Before choosing the title, determine what must be different because this person was hired.
What should the individual accomplish during the first 12 to 18 months?
Depending on the organization, the answer could include:
- Stabilizing an underperforming operation.
- Increasing throughput, quality or on-time delivery.
- Building an engineering function or introducing greater design discipline.
- Strengthening financial reporting, controls and forecasting.
- Leading a major capital project or systems implementation.
- Taking a new product from concept through commercialization.
- Establishing the company in a new market.
- Building customer, distributor or specification relationships.
- Developing a team that can eventually scale the effort.
Those outcomes do not necessarily require the same kind of leader, even when companies use similar titles to describe them.
A Plant Manager hired to stabilize a struggling facility may need a different background from one hired to prepare a strong operation for significant growth.
A Controller brought in to create financial discipline in a founder-led company may need to be much more hands-on than one joining an established corporate accounting structure.
An engineering leader may be expected to build a team, improve processes, drive product development or oversee complex customer projects. Each requires a different emphasis.
A Product Manager may need deep technical expertise, commercial judgment, project discipline or the ability to connect all three.
Until the company determines which outcomes matter most, it cannot accurately define the person it needs.
Decide what must already be present
Newly created positions often become wish lists.
The company wants technical expertise, strategic leadership, hands-on execution, people management, industry relationships, financial understanding and the ability to build an entirely new function.
The person should also live in the preferred location and fit within a compensation range developed before the market was researched.
Occasionally, that person exists. More often, the company must decide which capabilities are essential on day one and which can be supported or developed.
Does the organization need an operational turnaround leader or someone capable of scaling an already successful facility?
Does it need a technically sophisticated engineering leader who can develop people, or a proven people leader who can rely on strong technical experts already on the team?
Does the accounting function need someone who can personally rebuild processes, or someone ready to lead a developed team and advise the executive group?
Does the company need a product expert who can influence commercial growth, or a market-focused product leader who can work closely with engineering?
These are different searches.
The goal is not to lower expectations. It is to establish the correct order of importance.
Define how the person must operate
Culture fit should not mean finding someone everyone likes or someone whose personality matches the existing leadership team.
It should describe how work gets done within the organization.
Consider:
- How much independence will this person have?
- How frequently will leadership expect collaboration and feedback?
- How are decisions made?
- How are new ideas challenged?
- How quickly must the person adapt when something is not working?
- Will the individual inherit a developed team or build one?
- How involved will the person remain in the daily work?
- Does the environment reward individual ownership, consensus or a combination of both?
A leader accustomed to extensive corporate resources may struggle in a smaller organization that expects people to solve problems personally.
A highly autonomous operator may be exactly wrong for a leadership team that makes major decisions collaboratively.
A strategic executive may become frustrated in a position that is still heavily tactical. A gifted hands-on problem solver may struggle when the organization needs them to build systems and lead through others.
None of these individuals is necessarily a poor candidate. Their established way of succeeding may simply be incompatible with what the organization needs.
One of the most useful questions a company can ask is:
“What type of person has struggled here, and why?”
The answer often provides more insight than a generic list of company values.
Test the idea against the market
Before finalizing the position, the company should determine whether the desired candidate profile exists in sufficient numbers and whether those individuals can realistically be attracted.
Early market research may reveal that:
- The right people carry different titles than expected.
- The strongest candidates sit in an adjacent industry.
- The desired technical, leadership and commercial capabilities rarely exist at equal depth in one person.
- The preferred geography eliminates most of the qualified talent.
- The compensation range does not reflect the experience required.
- The reporting structure makes the role less attractive than leadership expected.
- The most relevant candidates are not actively looking and will need a compelling reason to engage.
That information should influence the search before outreach begins.
Market calibration is not about allowing candidates to dictate the position. It is about making an informed decision based on the talent that actually exists.
A company may ultimately keep every original requirement. It should simply understand what those requirements mean for the candidate pool, compensation and likely search timeline.
Then write the job description
Once the company has defined the business outcome, candidate profile, working style and realistic market parameters, the job description becomes much easier to write.
More importantly, it becomes more effective.
It can explain:
- Why the position exists.
- What the person will be expected to build, improve or change.
- How success will be measured.
- What resources and internal support are available.
- Where the individual will have authority and influence.
- Why the opportunity should matter to an established, successful candidate.
That is very different from combining several existing job descriptions and hoping the right person recognizes themselves in the list.
The job description should be the result of the talent strategy, not the starting point for it.
Companies creating a new leadership position do not need to have every answer before beginning the conversation.
They do, however, need to be willing to examine the business problem, challenge their initial assumptions and listen to what the talent market tells them.
The title can come later.
The first question is what the organization genuinely needs this person to accomplish.