Key takeaways
Define what success looks like by establishing clear selection criteria aligned with the organisation’s strategic priorities and future leadership needs.Assess candidates consistently. Evaluate evidence objectively and test candidates against real business challenges to understand how they would perform in the role.Address bias throughout the selection process to support a fair and considered decision.Make the appointment with confidence. A rigorous selection process can strengthen stakeholder confidence, reduce avoidable risk and support a successful leadership transition.
An executive search process can uncover a host of credible candidates, each offering a different combination of experience, leadership capabilities and commercial prowess. However, despite weeks (or months) of searching, interviewing and due diligence, the final decision still carries significant uncertainty.
With 24 years of experience in C-suite retained executive search, I know just how complex these decisions can be for business leaders. In fact, choosing among executive finalists has never carried more weight for Australian boards.
As Senior Managing Director at Robert Half Executive Search, I work closely with boards, CEOs, and senior leadership teams to deliver transformative leadership appointments.
Interviews and reference checks will only take you so far. In some cases, the candidate with the strongest resume won’t necessarily be the best fit. Similarly, the candidate who shines in the interview may not be well equipped to deliver the organisation’s long-term strategy.
It’s a high-stakes decision. Your appointment must stand up to scrutiny, align with the organisation’s strategic priorities and give stakeholders confidence in the direction of the business.
Of course, there are also competing considerations to balance, from immediate performance expectations and organisational culture to stakeholder expectations, leadership style and long-term risks.
So, how do you choose between executive candidates when each has something different to offer?
I believe it comes down to a structured, evidence-based decision-making process.
In this article, I’ll explore how to choose a leader after an executive search process. I’ll outline the dos and don’ts, and explain why the best appointment isn’t about where a candidate has been, but where they can take your business in the future.
Related: How to hire a CFO: A step-by-step guide for Australian businesses
Why the decision is difficult
Rest assured, uncertainty is a completely normal feeling during an executive search.
If you haven’t already realised, this feeling only intensifies at the latter stages.
By this point, you’ll likely be weighing up several outstanding candidates who all bring something unique to the table. The real challenge lies in identifying who has the skill set to not only lead your business but drive it forward.
Over the course of my career, I’ve learnt that several factors can complicate the decision:
Different strengths – While one candidate may have a proven track record for driving growth, another may have a solid reputation for managing risk. Strong interview performance - Interviewers beware; confidence can make a strong impression but it can also obscure weaknesses. A great interview doesn’t always translate to effective leadership. Competing priorities - Board members and executives may have different views on what the business needs most; therefore, they may not be aligned on what qualities are most valuablePressure to make a decision – In my experience, urgency can encourage premature consensus and rushed appointments.Familiarity bias - Candidates with distinctive backgrounds or experience at reputable organisations may seem like the safest choice, despite another candidate being better suited to the role.
Take it from me, these challenges are all normal. However, they highlight why instinct alone isn’t enough. To make a sound decision, you must look beyond first impressions and review each candidate in the context of what the business needs to achieve.
Let’s explore the practical ways to do this so you can identify who can take your business where it needs to go.
1) Start with the organisation’s future, not the candidates’ past
It can be tempting to focus solely on a candidate’s past achievements. However, knowing how to choose a leader requires sharp foresight.
While this past performance carries some weight, I encourage all of my clients to deeply consider the future.
What I mean by this is carving out time to define what your organisation needs from its next leader.
I’ve found that when decision-makers do this, they begin to see candidates through a different lens. It becomes less about what the candidate has done, and more about what they can do.
Before comparing finalists, consider:
What must the leader achieve in the first two to three years?What business conditions will they inherit?What changes must they lead?Which stakeholders must they influence?What leadership capabilities will matter most?
At the executive level, exceptional performance is assumed. The real question is whether a candidate has the capacity to deliver on your unique business strategy.
Recently, I worked with two businesses that were looking for executive leaders. That was where the similarities ended.
The first business was in a rapid growth stage and desperately needed a leader who could scale operations and build a robust team. The second was a legacy company undergoing major transformation – they needed an expert in change management and stakeholder relations.
While both appointments were highly accomplished, they were vastly different. It was their unique capabilities that made them suitable for the roles.
These business leaders acknowledged that candidate suitability directly correlated with what each organisation needed moving forward.
I firmly believe that defining your priorities will give you a clearer basis for comparison, helping you to choose a leader based on more than just past achievements.
2) Agree on the selection criteria before debating candidates
With your future priorities established, you can then move on to establishing a criteria to evaluate each candidate.
In my opinion, this is simply ‘non-negotiable’.
This is where synergy between board members and executives can come undone (if there is no solid framework in place).
When these groups work in the absence of robust criteria, they are likely to prioritise vastly different qualities which only makes a consensus harder to reach.
Before discussing each individual, take the time to establish a consistent set of criteria, including but not limited to:
Strategic leadership: The ability to set direction and identify opportunities.Execution capability: A track record of delivering measurable results.Cultural contribution: The ability to strengthen business culture.Stakeholder management: The capacity to build trust and influence key stakeholders.People leadership: The ability to develop talent and build high-impact teams.Adaptability: The judgement to navigate change and uncertainty.Values and integrity: A commitment to ethical decision-making and accountability.Relevant experience: Skills and experience aligned with the business’s challenges.Capacity to grow with the role: The capacity to develop alongside the organisation.
Of course, some of these will be more important than others depending on the goals of the business.
If your business is embarking on a transformation project, strategic leadership might be your top priority. However, if you are growing your team, people leadership could be more important for the immediate future.
Whatever your goal, agreeing on these priorities upfront is critical.
I’ve seen it pay dividends for businesses, creating a consistent benchmark for assessing candidates and streamlining the final decision.
3) Compare evidence rather than impressions
My recruitment career has taught me that a strong interview doesn’t necessarily equate to strong leadership.
I learnt pretty quickly that you can’t afford to be fooled by confidence and charisma.
I’ve seen plenty of companies fall into the trap of hiring great conversationalists, only to find that they couldn’t carry themselves (or the business) once they were onboarded.
When comparing executive candidates, I’m looking for more than just a good chat. I’m making a conscious effort to zone in on any evidence that demonstrates their ability to hit the ground running for my clients.
I’d encourage you to focus on:
Structured interview responses: Responses to consistent questions about relevant leadership challenges.Track record and measurable results: Quantifiable evidence of proven achievements, as well as the candidate’s role in achieving them. Leadership assessments: Insights into leadership style, decision-making and development areas.Reference conversations: Specific examples of performance, strengths and potential concerns.Case-study or scenario exercises: How candidates approach real-world business challenges and explain their decisions.Consistency across different stages of the process: Whether their responses, behaviours and claims align across interviews, assessments and reference checks.
For me, knowing how to choose a leader comes down to more than just a reputation or first impression.
I encourage all business leaders in this position to dig deeper.
What I mean by this is: don’t just settle for results; push for answers.
If a candidate claims they generated greater profits, don’t be afraid to ask them ‘how’. Consider whether this was down to their leadership or whether it was the result of favourable market conditions or the strength of their existing team.
Here, your goal should be to build a balanced picture of each finalist, assessing their capabilities against the specified criteria.
4) Test candidates against real leadership challenges
As an executive recruiter, I don’t just want to hear about what candidates can do – I want to see it.
To that end, I always employ practical scenarios as a way of getting further insight into how they might handle the challenges ahead.
I recommend testing finalists against situations relevant to the organisation’s priorities, such as:
Leading a difficult transformationManaging disagreement with the boardRebuilding a senior teamResponding to underperformanceCommunicating during uncertaintyBalancing short-term results with long-term strategy
Recently, I partnered with a business that was preparing for a major restructure. We asked the final stage candidates how they would approach the first 90 days, engage stakeholders and maintain performance.
My client and I paid close attention to their reasoning as well as their proposed actions. We considered how they made decisions, weighed competing priorities, and measured success.
My client was originally unsure about how to choose a leader, but implementing these tests made the decision so much simpler.
As I see time and time again, these discussions can help to distinguish candidates who talk well from those who can walk their talk, demonstrating the judgement and capabilities the role demands.
5) Examine culture without hiring for similarity
In business, culture is king.
When it comes to executive appointments, there is certainly an art to optimising cultural alignment.
As I emphasise to my clients, achieving a ‘cultural fit’ is not about finding a leader who is ‘just like everyone else’.
This kind of familiarity isn’t always favourable.
As I’ve seen, hiring leaders who share the existing team’s backgrounds, experiences or working styles can limit diversity of thought and overlook candidates who could deliver fresh perspectives.
I encourage you to distinguish between:
Cultural fit: How closely a candidate aligns with the existing leadership team.Cultural contribution: How a candidate can strengthen the organisation’s culture while challenging practices that need to change.
For example, if your business culture is quite entrepreneurial, you may actually need a leader who introduces greater accountability while safeguarding innovation.
Rather than asking whether a candidate feels like a natural fit, consider whether their values, behaviours and leadership style will support the organisation’s future trajectory.
6) Identify bias and manage disagreement
Two of the biggest issues I see when business leaders embark on an executive search are personal bias and group disagreements.
Often it’s not intentional, but it does pay to put practices in place to keep both in check.
You might have been influenced by unconscious bias when evaluating candidates in the past (you might not have even known). Common examples include:
Similarity bias: Favouring candidates with similar backgrounds or experiences.Charisma bias: Overvaluing confidence (remember, charisma doesn’t equal leadership capability).Recency bias: Giving too much weight to the most recent interview.Confirmation bias: Looking for evidence that supports an existing preference.Reputation bias: Overvaluing a candidate’s profile or previous employer.
We all have our own biases, and often, that can be the source of disagreements. To minimise both of these issues, I recommend a systematic approach:
Score candidates independently using the pre-determined criteria. Only commence discussions once this has been completed. Record supporting evidence rather than relying on impressions alone. Discuss major differences in scores to understand the reasoning behind each opinion. Revisit the agreed selection criteria to steer away from biased personal preferences. Separate concerns supported by evidence from personal discomfort to ensure evidence-based concerns are addressed properly
I want to stress that respectful disagreements are not a sign of failure. I firmly believe it’s where growth happens - disagreements can actually strengthen the decision when handled constructively.
Ultimately, it’s not about choosing the most popular candidate – it’s about agreeing on who is best equipped to drive the organisation forward.
Related: How to ensure a confidential executive search
7) Assess the risks of appointing (and not appointing) each candidate
In my experience, clients are often unsure about how to choose a leader because they are determined to find a candidate who has ‘no weaknesses’.
My career has taught me that this isn’t always realistic. Every candidate has their limitations along with strengths and a different degree of success potential.
When reviewing your candidates, be sure to consider:
What could make them successful?What could be a struggle for them? Could they be supported with these challenges?Could these risks be completely mitigated?Are these gaps/risks fundamental to the role?What opportunities might the business lose by rejecting them?
What I like about these questions is that they can help you to understand the trade-offs and the risks associated with each candidate.
They may not tick all the boxes, but whoever ticks the right ones will have the greatest potential to optimise the future of your business.
As an example, I recently partnered with a business that was looking to expand into a new market. The final stages of their executive search came down to two candidates.
One had extensive experience in that market but a less impressive track record of leading growth.
The other had spearheaded expansion in other markets but lacked direct local experience.
As the business already has strong local market expertise, the second candidate was selected. The team felt that they were better poised to drive the overall strategy while drawing on business support to bridge the knowledge gap.
On another note, always remember to consider the cost of delaying the decision. I’ve seen businesses suffer as a result of prolonged leadership uncertainty or the loss of strong candidates to another opportunities.
Related: Signs your business needs an interim CFO
8) Make the decision and document the reasoning
Complete certainty is unlikely when appointing an executive, but a solid process should help to give decision-makers like yourself confidence in the choice.
The final decision should reflect:
The organisation’s future needs and priorities. Evidence of each candidate’s capabilities and track record.Alignment with the agreed selection criteria.Risks that have been deemed as manageable. Confidence in the candidate’s ability to earn trust and deliver results.
As the old saying goes, “Get everything in writing”.
It’s also my recommendation when it comes to executive search.
I’d encourage you to record any relevant details that can be referenced down the track. These include but are not limited to:
Why the preferred candidate was selected.Evidence supporting the decision.Any material risks considered.Reference checks.Employment history.Relevant background checks.
You should strive to make a considered, defensible decision based on solid evidence rather than gut instinct or pressure to fill the role.
9) Plan for success before the appointment is announced
Partner with our executive search experts
Knowing how to choose a leader is only the beginning.
The next phase is about setting them up for success through a considered, well-designed onboarding process.
Before announcing the appointment, implement a structured framework around:
First-year expectations: Define key priorities, milestones and measures of success.Board and executive alignment: Clarify responsibilities, decision-making authority and communication expectations.Stakeholder introductions: Schedule introductions to key internal and external stakeholders.Early performance priorities: Identify immediate challenges while allowing time to understand the business and the team.Continued support: Lock in regular feedback and performance reviews.
A thoughtful transition will give your leader the best chance to hit the ground running, building trust and lasting business outcomes.
Take it from me, choosing an executive leader is not about finding a risk-free candidate. It is about making a disciplined, evidence-based judgment about who can lead your organisation forward.
In my experience, the strongest appointments don’t always stem from an impressive CV. They come from a robust process founded on clear criteria, objective evidence and an honest assessment of risk.
Don’t shy away from respectful disagreements – with a structured approach, there is room for discourse, and it will only give you and your hiring team greater confidence in your final choice.
Related: 7 things to do to get the executive recruitment process right
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
How do you choose between two strong executive candidates?
If you are trying to choose between two candidates, it’s important to:
Start with the organisation’s future, not the candidates’ past.Agree on the selection criteria before debating candidates.Compare evidence, not impressions.Test candidates against real leadership challenges.Examine culture without hiring for similarity.Identify bias and manage disagreement.Assess the risks of appointing (and not appointing) each candidate.Make the decision and document the reasoning.Plan for success before the appointment is announced.
What criteria should be used to evaluate executive candidates?
Executive candidates should be evaluated against criteria such as strategic leadership, execution capability, cultural contribution, stakeholder management, people leadership, adaptability, integrity and the experience needed to deliver the organisation’s future objectives.
How can you reduce bias when selecting an executive?
To reduce bias:
Score candidates independently using the pre-determined criteria. Only commence discussions once this has been completed. Record supporting evidence rather than relying on impressions alone.Discuss major differences in scores to understand the reasoning behind each opinion.Revisit the agreed selection criteria to steer away from biased personal preferences.Separate concerns supported by evidence from personal discomfort to ensure evidence-based concerns are addressed properly.
Ultimately, it’s not about choosing the most popular candidate – it’s about agreeing on who is best equipped to drive the organisation forward.
Should cultural fit influence an executive hiring decision?
Achieving a ‘cultural fit’ is not about finding a leader who is ‘just like everyone else’.
In some cases, hiring leaders who share the existing team’s backgrounds, experiences or working styles can limit diversity of thought and overlook candidates who could deliver fresh perspectives.
It’s important to distinguish between:
Cultural fit: How closely a candidate aligns with the existing leadership team.Cultural contribution: How a candidate can strengthen the organisation’s culture while challenging practices that need to change.
Rather than asking whether a candidate feels like a natural fit, consider whether their values, behaviours and leadership style will support the organisation’s future trajectory.
What should you do before making a final executive appointment?
Before making a final executive appointment, organisations should complete thorough due diligence, verify the candidate’s experience and references, assess their suitability against agreed selection criteria, evaluate potential risks and ensure alignment among key decision-makers.
What happens after you select your preferred executive candidate?
Knowing how to choose a leader is only the beginning.
The next phase must focus on setting them up for success through a considered, well-designed onboarding process.
Before announcing the appointment, implement a structured framework around:
First-year expectationsBoard and executive alignmentStakeholder introductionsEarly performance prioritiesContinued support
