This collection brings together our perspectives on executive search, technology leadership and the realities of senior decision making. We look beyond the surface of leadership appointments and into the behaviours, judgement calls and cultural signals that influence organisational performance. If you are interested in how leadership really works, this is the place to start.
Page 1 of 11 · 123 articles
The Collaborator is the schema you appoint to make a divided organisation move as one. It is also the one most likely to keep seeking agreement long after the moment for agreement has gone. The most dangerous phrase in a senior team is not “I disagree.” It is “let’s get everyone aligned first.” I watched a leader run a good business into a wasted quarter on that phrase, and almost nobody in the room could see it happ
The most expensive senior appointment I have watched fail had the best roadmap I have ever seen. I mean that sincerely. It was a genuinely impressive piece of thinking. Every workstream mapped, every dependency identified, governance and sequencing and risk all accounted for. The board saw it in month three and applauded. He was still refining it in month fourteen, when they let him go.
The Commander is the schema you appoint in a crisis. It is also the one you have to watch once the crisis has passed. There is a phrase you hear in big organisations when nothing is moving. "It's just how things get done here." Say it out loud and it sounds like culture. Listen properly and it is something sharper. It means someone at the top is commanding, and everyone below has quietly learned to wait.
The board thought they had found the perfect CEO. Two successful exits. A scaled multinational division. References that read like a character witness: decisive, commercially sharp, a natural leader. In the interview he was confident, fluent, convincing on growth and culture and transformation. The appointment was unanimous. Twelve months later the same board was negotiating his exit. Revenue targets had been missed.
There’s one question almost every HR-led interview process insists on. “Tell me about a time you failed.” At junior level, it sometimes earns its keep. At C-suite, it’s a junk question. And it’s almost always the wrong thing to ask in the room. I’ll explain why I won’t ask it. And then I’ll tell you what I ask instead.
Most succession planning assumes someone is ready to step up. But what happens when the obvious successor is the one who leaves? A look at why heir apparent plans fail, the real cost of an unplanned leadership transition, and how boards build genuine continuity.
Imagine accepting a senior leadership role and, in the same conversation, being told the date you will be let go. Not as a threat. Not as a warning. As a feature of the offer. That is exactly how one HR director I worked with used to transformational senior hires. After walking the candidate through salary, package, incentives, all the usual bits, she would lean in and say something close to this:
I was briefing a candidate last week. On paper, exceptional. A consulting career at one of the global firms, then a move into a chief of staff role at the global level, leading strategy and go-to-market across multiple regions. The kind of profile that makes you sit up.
Some companies are so successful that they never have to be brilliant. Think about the organisations that dominate their markets so completely that urgency simply does not exist. The revenue keeps coming. The brand carries weight. The infrastructure is established. And somewhere inside that comfort, the standard of leadership quietly settles into something unremarkable.
Succession planning too often rewards visibility over viability. The squeaky wheel gets noticed, but the quiet engine actually keeps the organisation moving. In many businesses, the squeaky wheel ends up on the succession plan simply because it is easier to see. That shortcut is getting riskier. With employers expecting nearly 40% of workers’ core skills to change by 2030, the signals we use to identify future leaders need to change as well.
I interviewed someone this week who has spent 31 years at the same organisation Fast tracked early in his career. Senior roles. MBA. Extremely well qualified. Articulate. Impressive in every measurable way. He was positioning himself as a transformation leader. Now, I’m not in the game of criticising anyone, or framing things negatively for my own gain. But my own personal observation here could save a board millions and years of wasted momentum.
Consider the last board meeting where AI featured in the strategy deck. The slides were polished. The use cases were compelling. The vendor had impressive references. Perhaps you even approved the budget.
