There is one habit we have never abandoned. After every client interview, we debrief the candidate. Not as a courtesy, but because those conversations often reveal more than the interview itself. We want to know what surprised them, what they learned that was not in the brief and, most importantly, how they felt about the company once they had met the people leading it.
One of those conversations has stayed with me.
We were recruiting a Chief Executive for China for a Norwegian chemicals company expanding in the region. The candidate had spent fifteen years leading substantial businesses across Asia and knew the market better than almost anyone else we had met. I asked how the interview had gone.
She said she had decided after the second question that she would not accept the role.
Not because the interview had been hostile. Quite the opposite. It was because of what the questions revealed.
The board asked her to describe her management style. She answered with a real example. Nobody explored it. Nobody asked why she had made those decisions, what alternatives she had considered or what she had learned from the outcome. They simply thanked her and moved on to the next question.
By the end of the interview she had reached her own conclusion.
The company had spent six months searching for a chief executive, yet the interview suggested the board did not know how to distinguish genuine leadership judgement from a well rehearsed answer. They gathered information, but they never tested it.
She did not reject the opportunity because the questions were difficult. She rejected it because they were not.
Boards often assume an interview exists to decide whether the candidate is right for the organisation. Experienced executives know the interview works both ways. While the board is assessing them, they are assessing the board.
They notice the quality of the questions. They notice who asks them and who remains silent. They notice whether the interviewers understand the candidate’s background or simply follow a script. They notice whether answers spark discussion or are merely acknowledged before the next question appears. They notice whether the people around the table think together or merely take turns.
For an experienced executive, the interview quickly becomes a window into how the organisation makes decisions. That can be far more revealing than the job description.
Over the years I have spoken to many candidates who left an interview convinced they had underperformed. When we unpacked what had happened, a different picture usually emerged. Nobody had asked about the hardest judgement they had ever made. Nobody had explored what success would look like three years into the role. Nobody had challenged their thinking. The conversation had remained safely within the boundaries of the job description.
The candidate for China reached a different conclusion. She had not learned anything important about herself. She had learned a great deal about the organisation.
The best interviewers do far more than collect information. They probe, test and assess judgement. They ask questions that cannot be answered with a prepared story. They listen carefully, follow the thread of an answer and know enough about the role to recognise when they have reached real insight rather than polished presentation.
The strongest candidates recognise that difference immediately. They are watching how decisions are made, how disagreement is handled, whether curiosity is genuine and whether the people in the room truly understand the appointment they are trying to make.
Every interview is therefore a demonstration of the company’s leadership as much as an assessment of the candidate.
Afterwards, boards almost always ask the same question.
How did the candidate perform?
There is another question that deserves equal attention.
What did the candidate learn about us?
Because the most accomplished executives are not only deciding whether they want the role. They are deciding whether they want the organisation. Very often, they reach that conclusion long before the board does.
by Andrew Kris, Founding Partner of Borderless Executive Search & Leadership Consulting. He writes the Boardroom Observations series, exploring boardroom judgement and the leadership decisions that shape organisations.
We are pleased to welcome Ann de Grave to the Borderless team as an executive search consultant. Ann joined us on 5 October and brings considerable experience in shaping organisations, leaders and cultures across many markets and industries to our global executive search work.
We began with a line from one of our conversations: “If leaders do not like the speed today, they may not like what comes next.” We do not see that pace slowing down. Experience still matters, obviously. The more useful question is which kinds of experience prepare someone for problems nobody has faced before.
Modern workplace demands require leaders to continuously update their skills rather than rely on past successes. Artificial intelligence and organizational complexity mean leadership effectiveness is not a permanent achievement. According to Microsoft and Zenger Folkman research, leaders face significant penalties for lacking digital fluency.
