Acing Interviews for Executives

Tweet: Many executives with stellar résumés are bummed-out by the democratic selection process at their target companies. Here’s an analysis of how to avoid failure.

Having now worked with many C-level and senior executives I find that they often run into problems when going through job interviews, as they navigate through their transition. What makes this experience frustrating for them is that, despite their success and conviction to the contrary, the feedback they get in their rejection leaves them scratching their heads.

One recent example is of a Silicon-Valley senior executive, who is my client, who decided to make a job change after being at the same company for more than 10 years. He was a catch in every aspect of his value proposition: an impeccable track record of leading large groups of technologists in establishing major revenue channels for his company. His employer was a leading provider of enterprise IT systems and services, where my client had made a name for himself on many fronts; scaling a nascent technology concept into a global juggernaut in just three years; developing a powerhouse sales engine that generated billions in revenues in the emerging markets now dominated by that technology, to name just a few of his accomplishments.

As a result of his brand and reputation in the industry competitors and others have always been interested in poaching his employer and for onboarding him for themselves. Recently, he approached me for help in deciding what his best career move would be as he wanted to create good options for himself. So, we spent the first few sessions looking at what would be the best next move for him and what company would offer the needed canvas for him to grow beyond just his next stint. His current employer was willing to do whatever it took to retain him as well!

At one of the many companies that was interested in him he started interviewing with his first meeting with the CEO, who was already quite impressed and excited—even enamored—about the possibility of bringing him into his company before even meeting him. As a part of the process he then asked his executive team to vet my client for his second round, which he also cleared with flying colors. The third round was with my client’s executive team that would be reporting to him. This was then followed by the rank-and-file members within his team and other teams that would be part of his ecosystem within that company.

As he started downshifting his interviews it became apparent that those who would be organizationally below his level and all the way down to the front-line workers—developers, architects, product managers, QA teams, among others—gave critical feedback to the hiring team that they found him aloof, unapproachable, and intimidating; someone who may not be able to bring out the best in them in their everyday work.

When he got this feedback, he felt both mortified and surprised by what he heard from the executive recruiter. After listening to the client’s side of the story and probing on how each of these interviews went for him I concluded that this client was great at managing his interviews well upwards and sideways, but needed to understand better how to create his leadership presence with the folks that work with him every day through the proper interview communication and signaling. My opinion was that this was just the way he interviewed and not a character flaw in how he conducted himself. I know this by how he grew in his career managing large teams, organizing, growing, and retaining them.

Why was this important?

For one, my client had received kudos for managing his own teams, growing them from the ground-up, and retaining top talent in difficult times. So, it was not that he did not know how to lead a team to bring out the best in each member of that team, but that the post-interview impression he left after individual meetings with people at these levels was less than favorable. The irony here is at his own company he did quite well working at all levels, and especially in bringing out the best from his team members, all the way down to the interns, new hires, and individual contributors.

The interesting aspect of this outcome is that it is not just limited to this particular client or someone only at the C-level trying to finesse a series of different interviews. During my coaching practice I find this playing out time and again in the same pattern: Despite great interviews with the higher-ups and despite their proven record of working well with their own teams and others the impression they leave during the interviews somehow does not help them.

So, Why does this happen and how to manage this for a better outcome? Here is my take:

1. Generally, when you start interviewing from the top and ratchet down for qualifying interviews it is quite easy for senior executives to make a great impression on the leaders at these levels. Yet, two factors come into play that can militate against a successful outcome: For one, communicating up at these levels requires well-honed presentation skills, confidence, and conceptual skills of technologies, business, customers, trends, and preferences. Here, short and highly structured answers can work well as senior executives are well versed in such exchanges. Secondly, when you clear the top-level interviews in a breeze your mindset can put you in a complacent mode, because you assure yourself that since the top brass—those who have the veto power—has been enamored of you, winning over the “everyday” folks would follow. As my client painfully learned that was not the case here—and he is not alone in this painful experience.
2. When you are such a coveted candidate the top brass is already predisposed favorably to bringing you on board and is reluctant to finding things that may vitiate their ability to green light you for a quick hire. So, it is easy to impress an already predisposed audience of decision-makers; because, here, you are almost hard-pressed to do anything wrong!
3. So, what approach must one use to win over both factions of your constituency? Here are some factors to consider:
i. Learn about the culture of the company early in the process by having detailed conversations with the HR person, your executive recruiter, and by looking up the company. Understand how the selection and the interview process is designed. It is good to know early-on how you are going to get qualified. Merely getting green lighted by the top brass is sometimes not enough, as my client found out in this case.
ii. Understand how cross-hierarchy communication takes place. In one of my previous blogs I had referred to the concept of Power-Distance-Index (PDI). In companies with high PDI, communication between employees at different levels takes place more formally. In low-PDI cultures it is more casual, informal, and fluid.
iii. Use different ways of communicating as you start going down the hierarchy. At lower levels more informal and unstructured communication can work much better. Also, engaging the person by frequent back-and-forth with them can show engagement than when you start lecturing them about “your ways.” Such conversations can make you look too set in your ways, unwilling to even listen to the ground reality where they are, and railroading them into something that they think may not work for them. If you see yourself as a change agent—that is why they are looking at you at the C-levels—then assure the everyday folks that the change will start from where they are, and not from where you are!
iv. When technology—or any technical area—is involved having a more detailed discussion about what is important to the person interviewing you can be critical. Showing conceptual understanding can work at the top levels, but when hands-on teams start discussing technical details you must come across as credible to them without building yourself a moat because of your status and lofty thinking. If you do not know something it is best to show your vulnerability and to assure them how that will not be a showstopper in your everyday work. Showing your vulnerability, especially, at the lower echelons of the organization and with those destined to work with you can actually help you in establishing your likability than showing-off your invincibility, bravado, and ersatz knowledge because of your station. The latter may make you look aloof and unapproachable, a critical factor to avoid in building team trust.
4. One of the ways to ingratiate yourself with lower echelons of the organization is to talk about their everyday challenges and letting them open up to changes that you could bring to make their life easier as a result of your leadership (see 3-iii above). One must learn to do this without patronizing or coming across as condescending. This is an important aspect of how to do this right and how to avoid doing it wrong!
5. Remember that the top brass (CEO and their staff) have veto power, both individually and together, to make the hiring decision in most companies. But, as you go down the hierarchy this decision is more based on group consensus. What this means is that you must be authentic in your interactions without trying to please everyone. Trying to please everyone, especially at the working levels can backfire. In some of those discussions make sure that you disagree without becoming disagreeable.
6. Part of being authentic also means translating your own observations into carefully formulated questions that provide the interviewers (both above and below you) insights about how you are viewing the organization, the business, and its culture. Having carefully crafted discussion around such observations can make the difference between someone who is coming to make things better for them, or someone who is going to make their lives difficult.
7. There are three ways the interview process can be structured, which depends on your entry point. If the top leadership of a company making the hire has already come after you, you are likely to start at the top, as it happened in the case of this client. If you are approaching your target company through your own channels then you are likely to start in the middle, go down, and then go up. It is also quite possible that despite your station you can start with the front lines just to check you out before higher-ups decide to invest their time in the process. Each of these settings requires a different approach to how you navigate through the process to keep yourself as a viable candidate, who ends up with an offer.
8. My own experience with many senior executives is that when they start at the top and when the front line staff has a collective voice in the hiring decision they do significantly worse (fewer offers) than when they start at the bottom and move up the chain of command during the interview process. So, there is a lesson here: Once you win over the masses and you are reasonably good at presenting your story to the top brass in a language they can relate to, your odds of getting an offer greatly improve.
Going through an interview process for an executive position has its rewards. But, unless you know and understand how the dynamic of communication among different constituencies within your target company can create a perception about your leadership that can get you selected for the hire you will be dealing with how the outcome of such a process can blindside you!

Good luck!