The Alexander Group Archives - Page 4 of 5

There are many lessons to glean from the challenges that businesses faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Leaders were suddenly tasked with guiding their organization through a volatile, ever-changing environment in which decisions had to be made quickly while keeping the health of their company and their workforce a priority.

For the thousands of pre-pandemic executive searches we conducted, the traits our clients most often asked us to look for were traits associated with high-performing business leaders: financial acumen, risk assessment, persuasive negotiating tactics, etc. Now, our clients are prioritizing the mental health of their workforce, and are seeking executives that not only have an aptitude for typical business skills, but who also possess traits that have proven to be effective in promoting the emotional stewardship of a workforce. Today’s most successful leaders display adaptability, empathy, and humility in executing their responsibilities.

Adaptability is key in a fast-paced business world. Adaptive leadership is defined by its emphasis on creativity, innovation, collaboration, and mutual respect to produce long-term change. A leader with these qualities can quickly assess a situation, identify the best course of action, and implement a plan that achieves results.

According to McKinsey, “adaptability is the critical success factor during periods of transformation and systemic change.” Surviving change is not the hallmark of adaptability, rather it is the ability to endure change, and use those learned experiences to move forward with purpose.

Empathy is another important leadership characteristic. Executives who are empathetic can see things from other people’s perspectives and understand their feelings. They can then use this understanding to build trust, motivate others, and resolve conflicts. This leadership quality proved especially important during the height of the pandemic when people were experiencing considerable amounts of stress.

Moreover, empathy has been shown to reverse the strains that stress puts on a person, particularly in their job performance. According to a Catalyst study of 889 employees, empathy has some profound effects on job performance. For example, 61% of employees who responded as having empathetic leaders were able to be more innovative, 76% reported being more engaged in their work, and 50% expressed that their workplace was more inclusive.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella credited the empathy he developed while raising his severely disabled son with shaping his drive to instill an empathetic culture at work. Empathy, Nadella writes, “[is] a quality that shapes our mission of empowerment at Microsoft and our quest to meet unmet and unarticulated needs of customers. And it’s the quality that helps us as a society move forward in creating new opportunity for all.”

Daniel Lubetzky built an entire company around the idea of empathy. He founded KIND with the idea that people would not only do the “kind thing” to their body by giving it a healthier snack option, but by doing kind things for others through acts of service and kindness. He believes that empathy gives executives a distinct competitive advantage.

He explains, “When I understand people with ease, I can accomplish more in both my business and my private life. Being able to access these skills is especially valuable in those moments when you feel threatened and your fight/flight instinct kicks in. If you can ask yourself questions like, ‘where is this person coming from?’ then you’re able to get to a more productive place quicker, thereby creating value for business and society.”

Humility is another highly sought-after characteristic among organizations looking for their next executives. Many companies even go as far as to have potential candidates do some sort of personality analysis or ask probing questions during the interview process designed to get a better idea of their aptitude for humility.

For example, humility-focused questions such as “Do you appreciate teammates’ feedback at work?” or “As a leader, do you think you’re entitled to more recognition than the rest of your team?” have become ways to determine a candidate’s ability to lead with humility, which, according to studies, has led to increased employee engagement, lower turnover, and stronger teamwork.

A study conducted by the University of Singapore and Arizona State University found that humble CEOs are more likely to have better-performing management teams, leading to better overall company performance. Antonia Hock, global head of the Ritz-Carlton Leadership Center, was asked by the Society for Human Resource Management what managers could do to lead with humility. She advised to ask yourself a few questions after leading meetings or having one-on-ones with your team members:

“Did I ask for feedback, ideas and opinions because I was really engaged or just as a token way to close?”
“Were the concepts, ideas or processes that I presented first vetted with employees at various levels? ‘Leaders miss on this one all the time,’ Hock says. ‘No one likes to be asked to buy into directives that they had no voice in forming.’”
“Did I acknowledge the role that others played in creating, designing or driving my ideas or thoughts? ‘Great leadership does not exist in a vacuum, so actively [point out] who advised you, inspired you or contributed,’ Hock adds. ‘If you don’t have anyone in this category, that’s a problem.’”

As businesses evolve, and the world continues to throw new challenges their way, executives are looked to for steady leadership. Although there are numerous traits that successful executives must have, perhaps the most important are the ones that define their personality. Adaptive, empathetic, and humble leaders are the ones best positioned to quickly gain the confidence of their teams, which is the foundation for success.

Strategist. Gatekeeper. Advisor. These aren’t just buzzwords for resumes or LinkedIn profiles. They are the critical duties of a role becoming prevalent in the C-Suite.

TV shows like “West Wing” and recent turnover at the Presidential level have attracted national attention to the role of Chief of Staff. Once primarily a government or military role, Chiefs of Staff (COS, for short) are beginning to appear on the rosters of non-government organizations. The trend began in the tech industry about five years ago as many former government officials left D.C. to join Silicon Valley startups.

“I first saw the role emerge more than 10 years ago in the financial services space,” says Jane Howze, Managing Director at The Alexander Group. “Larry Green held the title at Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. for six years, working side by side with President and Founder Dan Pickering.”

Today, the role has spread into banking, arts, professional services firms, and media. Warren Buffett has a Chief of Staff, as do Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier. Venture capitalist Peter Thiel’s COS famously went on to become Chief Technology Officer of the United States.

Demand for transparency, corporate accountability and the rise of social media mean that many chief executives are becoming more like politicians or public personalities, spending more time connecting with the public and media. Chief executives need a way to offload the work that isn’t getting done. Enter the Chief of Staff.

A springboard to the C-suite

As a researcher for an executive search firm, I often identify Chiefs of Staff as potential C-suite candidates: Chiefs of Staff learn first-hand what it takes to run and grow a business, and the experience can accelerate their careers. They have valuable operations, financial or human resources experience—or all of the above—and make excellent candidates for Chief Operations Officer, Chief Strategy Officer and many other C-Suite roles, depending on the search.

Chief of Staffs are also highly influential: This influence has helped women and people of color in the role forge their own unique career paths. “They are being positioned as the next wave of C-Suite executives themselves which is really exciting,” says Caroline Pugh, COS to President of CareJourney. “The chief of staff role could be the very role that finally evens out the gender disparity in boardrooms.”

Karen van Bergen, former CEO of Omnicom Public Relations Group, spent three years as Chief of Staff to the President of McDonald’s Europe before she advanced to the CEO role. Today, she serves as Dean of Omnicom University, the holding company’s long-standing management development program. Kathleen Lynch joined UBS Group Americas as Chief of Staff and a strategic advisor to senior management; today she serves as Chief Operating Officer.

”It’s the best leadership course you could potentially take,” said Nate Jenkins, Chief of Staff to Founder and Chief Executive of Sidewalk Labs, Daniel L. Doctoroff. “I am expanding how I both take in information and make decisions.”

What are typical responsibilities?

Beyond being the chief executive’s right hand, a COS will likely take on a specific focus while acting as a trusted partner for the chief. Sound ambiguous? “No Chief of Staff is the same,” according to Scott Amenta, another Chief of Staff profiled in a recent New York Times article. Dennis Yu, Chief of Staff at Chime, described the role as a “foil to the principal”. Like a weird kind of work twin? “Yes,” he replied.

Maggie Hsu, former Chief of Staff to the Zappos CEO, describes the variety of responsibilities a Chief of Staff may take on:

Administrative. These could include scheduling and planning meetings, attending along with the executive to take notes, and later following up on post-meeting action items. They may coordinate the executive’s calendar, keep critical contact information updated, and help them prioritize their tasks. It is important that a COS be organized, efficient and flexible.
Project management, such as tracking important initiatives, keeping stakeholders updated on a project’s status, and managing project teams. An ability to build relationships between business units is an important skill for a COS focused on project management. It is also important to be able to track the full lifecycle of a project from start to finish while keeping an eye on the big picture.
Financial. This could include running the budgeting cycle, conducting quarterly business reviews, preparing for board meetings, tracking financial metrics, or evaluating investment opportunities. This blend of administrative and strategic duties is a common task for a COS.
Strategic initiatives. It’s an ambiguous role and is custom-designed to fit the needs of a specific executive. As a result, the COS may take on projects that do not fit within any one business unit or function, such as developing new ideas and business opportunities, building out new functions or business units, designing function strategies, or providing decision support for stakeholders. Problem-solving skills are a must.
Human resources. Some Chiefs of Staff have human resources backgrounds: They may evaluate the organizational structure to identify gaps, update the recruitment process, carry out diversity & inclusion initiatives, or work with the Chief Human Resources Officer to streamline HR processes. They can play a part in the people operations of a company, influencing the community culture. Being people-oriented is important no matter what duties are assigned; it is especially helpful in this case.
Gatekeeping. Excellent communication skills are critical for this, as the COS represents the chief executive to his contacts and the public. The COS may spend much of their time fielding internal and external communications for the executive, vetting media requests, attending meetings on their behalf, and maintaining critical relationships. Excellent verbal and written communication skills are essential.

An effective Chief of Staff must be absolutely trustworthy.

Regardless of the blend of functional responsibilities, one quality trumps all others: Trust. An effective Chief of Staff serves as a trusted advisor who will represent and protect his or her executive’s reputation and serve as a trusted sounding board for politically sensitive and confidential matters. “The executive is constantly getting requests for their time, money, advice or other resources, and they need someone who can vet and respond to these requests appropriately,” says Hsu. “This requires a high degree of understanding and trust between the COS and the executive.”

Need more firepower in your C-suite?

“The main purpose of a chief of staff is to add firepower to the person he or she has been hired to support,” according to Chris Hutchins, the founder and CEO of Grove. Need that firepower in your C-suite? Hutchins suggests an organizational audit to discover what tasks are eating up too much of your chiefs’ time and what a COS could take on for her or him.

Ultimately, a Chief of Staff role will mean different things to different chief executives, and be an extension of that executive. No two are alike.

Brian Rumao, Chief of Staff to Jeff Weiner, LinkedIn’s CEO, said that while he has program management and strategic responsibilities, the role “has no boundaries or preconceived notions of how to measure success.” When discussing the details of his core responsibilities, Weiner said “The core part of the role is clearly defined. Above that, the role is ultimately what you make of it.”

Law firm governance models are central to The Alexander Group’s work, which involves assisting law firms in recruiting executives (many from outside the legal industry) to run their business operations. As law firm administrative talent has become more sophisticated, governance structures have evolved significantly. Rarely do law firms’ managing partners or chairs maintain robust legal practices today.

Moreover, the role of chair or managing partner is no longer a lifetime assignment, as it often was in the past.

AmLaw 100 Leadership Strategies for Evolving Governance Models

Although virtually all firms on the AMLaw 100 list have an executive or management committee that functions like a corporate board of directors, some firms are taking different approaches to the top leadership position of a firm. One approach that is becoming increasingly popular is for a firm to elect two co-managing partners, or both a chair and a managing partner. This dual leadership structure is adaptable across various types of law firms, from regional practices to global powerhouses, ensuring that governance models are tailored to their operational scope.

One of the co-managing partners or the chair will focus on strategy and external issues, while the other two will ensure that their firms run well. Schulte Roth, Kramer Levin, Kobre & Kim, Sullivan & Cromwell, Mayer Brown, and K&L Gates are examples of firms adopting this leadership structure.

To explore how dual leadership structures function in practice, John Lamar, a seasoned consultant specializing in law firm strategy, sat down with Michael Caccese, Chairman of K&L Gates LLP. In this interview, they discuss the firm’s governance model, the division of responsibilities between the chairman and managing partner, and how their collaborative approach has helped navigate challenges like global growth and the COVID-19 pandemic. Their conversation provides valuable insights into the benefits and best practices of adopting this innovative leadership structure.

Examining Law Firm Governance at K&L Gates LLP

As a prominent firm on the AMLaw 100 list, K&L Gates LLP employs approximately 2,000 lawyers across five continents. It has grown rapidly over the last twenty years through key acquisitions and organic growth. This growth reflects the scalability of governance models across different types of law firms, showcasing the adaptability of strategic leadership.

Here is my conversation with K&L Gates Chairman Michael Caccese about how this governance structure works.

John Lamar: K&L Gates is recognized for its strong operational foundation, culture, and governance structure. You serve as the firm’s chairman, and Jim Segerdahl serves as managing partner. Both of you and your partners describe this structure as a successful and synergistic partnership between the two of you. Can you talk about how that came about?

Mike Caccese: Prior to March 2017, K&L Gates firm leadership had one person serving in both roles. The firm’s Management Committee believed for numerous reasons that because of the growth of the firm both geographically and in headcount, along with the complexities of operating a global law firm in the 21st century, the roles of chairman and global managing partner should be separated.

John Lamar: Did you both assume your role at the same time?

Mike Caccese: Jim and I started our roles in March 2017.

John Lamar: Did you have a close working relationship previously?

Mike Caccese: Jim and I had a working relationship for many years, although I worked in our Boston office, and he is based in our Pittsburgh office. We were both members of the management committee and served as the two Vice Chairmen of the firm prior to 2017, which gave us the opportunity to work closely on firm strategic issues.

John Lamar: How do you divide responsibilities today in your respective roles as chairman and global managing partner?

Mike Caccese: Jim, as the Global Managing Partner, is responsible for the day-to-day management of the law firm and implementing the firm’s strategies established by the Management Committee. My role as Chairman is to work closely with the Management Committee on strategy, ensure that they receive the resources needed to fulfill their duties to the partnership, work closely with Jim on client and industry outreach, and assist Jim in implementing firm strategy.

John Lamar: How often do you communicate?

Mike Caccese: Jim and I communicate almost daily and use each other as sounding boards for addressing firm and industry issues.

John Lamar: How has your relationship and interaction with each other changed since Covid?

Mike Caccese: Since Jim and I assumed our roles, our relationship has become very close. COVID has only made it closer, with both of us and the Management Committee addressing the Covid-related challenges facing law firms, industry, and clients, few of which are the same across the various markets and geographies in which K&L Gates operates.

John Lamar: Since you had not worked from the same office or practice group previously, what did you both do to get the relationship off to such a positive footing?

Mike Caccese: It was not difficult. We both communicated frequently, shared similar visions, and focused on basing decisions on what was best for the partnership. Communication, respect, transparency, and a common goal enable us to work together seamlessly for the benefit of the partnership.

John Lamar: We are seeing many of our other clients considering dual management roles such as the one you and Jim share. What advice would you offer them?

Mike Caccese: Do not be hesitant to separate the two roles. Running a law firm is very complex, multi-faceted, and takes a team effort. Make sure that the two leaders have excellent communication and listening skills and both operate towards the same goals. Finally, the roles should be well defined, and one of the two positions should be clearly responsible for the day-to-day running of the law firm. One decision maker, two strategists.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Law Firm Leadership Structures

Since the start of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has set in motion an avalanche of both short- and long-term challenges for business leaders. Executives were faced with the short-term challenges of finding ways to keep their businesses functioning amid quarantine orders, revenue losses, and office closures. Law firm knowledge management became an indispensable tool during this period, enabling firms to maintain operational continuity by efficiently accessing and sharing critical information.

How CSOs Strengthen Law Firm Governance Models

To work through the long-term implications of this global disruption, many organizations turned to their Chief Strategy Officer (CSO), a multifaceted individual tasked with developing and executing strategic initiatives. Major global companies such as Kohl’s, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Petco, Molson Coors, and global law firm Kobre & Kim have CSOs in their C-suite to help develop and execute their organization’s long-term goals.

First introduced to the C-suite in the 1990s, the CSO ensures that the organization is well-positioned to meet potential future challenges, executes the Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) initiatives, and positions the organization for long-term success. To be effective, a CSO must build a culture of trust through institutional and industry knowledge. This trust allows them the fortitude to make difficult strategic decisions.

Similarly, the role of a Law Firm CMO (Chief Marketing Officer) has emerged as critical for shaping branding strategies, client outreach, and aligning marketing efforts with governance objectives. The job of formulating a corporate strategy traditionally has fallen on the Chief Executive Officer. Another critical aspect is law firm knowledge management, which ensures that institutional expertise is preserved, organized, and leveraged to support strategic initiatives. However, the complexities of the day-to-day operations of an organization often leave little time for chief executives to execute a long-term plan; this is where the Chief Strategy Officer steps in.

Why Law Firm Governance Models Are Key to Leadership Success in the AmLaw 100

Law firm governance models are evolving to meet the demands of a rapidly changing legal landscape. From dual leadership structures to the rising prominence of Chief Strategy Officers, effective governance and executive roles are crucial for driving growth, improving operational efficiency, and adapting to global challenges. Insights from industry leaders like K&L Gates highlight the importance of communication, strategic vision, and clearly defined responsibilities in achieving leadership success.

For more insights into executive roles in law firm management, visit The Alexander Group.

The Alexander Group celebrated 40 years of executive search leadership with an April celebration at The Podium at Porsche River Oaks in Houston. The evening drew more than 150 clients and friends of the firm, culminating in speeches from Managing Director and Founder Jane Howze, Managing Director John Lamar, and long-time client Larry Jobe, former Regional Managing Partner of Grant Thornton.

Other clients and friends of the firm attended the party, including Bud Simpson, a client since 1993. Bud was the former Chief Human Resources Officer for Coastal Corporation and a local not for profit leader. We also welcomed Linda Lang, former CEO of Jack-in-the-Box; Steve Taylor, CEO of the Arthritis Foundation, Phil Rudolph, former General Counsel of Jack-in-the-Box, Keith Fullenweider, Chairman of Vinson & Elkins, Kent Zimmerman, Senior Partner of Zeughauser Group, Nick Peacock, Chief Operating Officer of Baker Botts, Jay Sears, Managing Partner of NewQuest, Jim Katt CEO of US Cryo, Tom Brackin, CEO of American Omni Trading, and Andy Baker, former Managing Partner of Baker Botts.

Revved up and ready for the next four decades (and more) of service to our clients, the party featured a host of Porsche’s newest cars, a curated selection of light bites and special sips, a 360-camera booth, and a drawing for one party guest, who won Porsche test track experience.

Scroll through the images below for a look at The Alexander Group celebration.

Maria Anderson has joined Carlton Fields as Director of Legal Talent Management. Ms. Anderson is a seasoned law industry expert, knowledgeable in a wide range of areas, including talent management, attorney training and professional development, office administration matters, and workflow coordination.

Learn more about Ms. Anderson here.

This search was conducted and completed by John Mann and Michael Doering.

A few months ago, I reached out to an individual at a Fortune 500 company about a potential opportunity with a client. His background was unusual in that he had leaped from a domestic role into a position with substantial global responsibility. As it turns out, there was a story there.

In his prior role, he had been in close competition with a colleague for an Asia Pacific position. He had more experience than his colleague and had been working long hours in preparation for the move. When his colleague was awarded the role however, he was dumbfounded. He’d been passed over for the promotion, and his spirit was crushed.

This is not an uncommon story. Many strong performers are ambitious and enthusiastic for their next internal role. Getting passed over is disheartening. The real question is, what do you do next?

Take a deep breath… keep your cool

After taking a few days to process his emotions, this executive spoke to his managers to garner a better understanding of the situation. They reassured him that big things were in the works. They encouraged him to maintain his work ethic and get better acquainted with what the company was doing—not only in Asia, but on a global scale.

Two years later, a global position opened in the organization and, today, he manages every region across the globe. And the colleague who was promoted to the APAC position? That colleague now reports to him.

He is a perfect example of what to do when faced with professional setbacks. Disappointment, anger, and frustration are natural reactions but “in the moment, those emotions may prompt you to vent to the wrong people, snap at your manager or, worse—quit,” warns Mike Guerchon, Chief People Officer at Okta. It’s crucial to remember that “how you confront difficult situations is a reflection of your maturity and readiness to take a leadership position.” Keep your composure and maintain a professional demeanor.

Also, be sure to not let this disappointment reflect poorly on your performance. You still have a team to manage, targets to achieve and numbers to nail. “Don’t let those emotions interfere with your productivity,” writes Forbes contributor Andy Molinsky. Resilience is key. How you deal with disappointment demonstrates your EQ and readiness to take on additional leadership responsibilities.

“It’s not always possible to make things better, but it is always possible to make things worse,” advised Ben Dattner, author of The Blame Game and founder of Dattner Consulting. This is critical to remember while emotions are running high. Take a deep breath, go through the emotions once you have left the office, and collect your thoughts on how to proceed.

Talk to your manager

After the heat of the moment has passed, and your emotions have calmed, approach your manager and have a candid conversation. Listen closely, and be inquisitive.

While a combination of variables can influence internal talent decisions, here are a few common culprits that may be at play:

Background is too light. Every organization has specific needs. If the role encompasses a broad range of responsibilities, you may be missing a key component, such as international experience, change management or business development.
Too experienced. Yes, it happens! Fulfillment requires a balance between the knowledge to get the job done and the opportunity to grow. If you can do the role in your sleep, you’ll be bored in less than a year and casting your eye to the horizon.
Lack of gravitas. Do you project a polished, professional approach? Are you engaging, calm and confident? Consider how you connect with clients, colleagues and the highest levels of management.
Politics. “As much as we all wish promotions would go to the most talented, hardworking and dedicated people,” writes one Forbes contributor, “decades of office politics tell us that’s not always the case.”
Bad timing. Are you halfway through a critical project? Been in your role less than a year or two? Are organizational changes in the works that may impact your position? Timing is everything, and sometimes beyond your control.
It’s not you. Sometimes, there is simply someone better suited for the role. Maybe the person you were up against has slightly more experience or contributed to the bottom line in a way you’re not aware of. Or there could be broader, long-term factors involved.

Plan your next move

Now that you’ve gone through the emotions and have gained a clearer understanding as to why you were passed up, it’s time to transform a negative situation into a springboard for opportunity.

If you discover you are missing specific experience, talk to your manager about a career plan so you get that experience. Reinvest in your current role, and look for opportunities to innovate and expand your scope of work.
Are you missing soft skills, such as diplomacy, communication skills or emotional intelligence? Ask a mentor for honest feedback and get coaching if you need to. Take up a management training course to hone leadership qualities.
Bad timing? Short tenures and unfinished projects reflect poorly on you and disrupt your organization’s productivity. Invest more time in your current role. It will pay off in the long term.
If you suspect politics are at play, find a way to heal bad blood. Network with the people in the department or region to which you aspire. Build a base of positive support, especially among top leaders.

Know when to leave

Internal opportunities for advancement can be limited, especially as you rise to more senior levels. If, after careful assessment, you believe you’ve reached an impasse, it may be time to explore external opportunities.

While conducting a search for a Chief Marketing Officer for an Am Law 100 firm, I met a potential candidate who at the time served as a Director of Marketing. I asked her why she was considering a new opportunity. She told me that there had been turnover in the senior leadership at her firm, and most of the C-suite had turned over in the past two years. When the CMO announced his retirement, she was confident that she would be offered the position. Around the same time, however, a new Chief Operating Officer joined the firm and, rather than promoting from within, he brought the CMO from his former firm on board.

This candidate handled the situation with grace and humility, but quietly started exploring the market. She knew she was ready for the next step in her career, and without a viable near-term option at her current firm, she prepared to make her move.

Today, she is Chief Marketing Officer at a prestigious and profitable international law firm. She left her former firm on good terms and exemplifies the type of individual our clients retain us to recruit.

“Getting passed over for a promotion can feel like an impossible-to-overcome roadblock in your career path,” advises one Forbes contributor. “But by learning as much as you can from what went wrong and staying resilient, you can turn a negative into a positive that’ll help you land the next one.”

Kevin Herglotz has joined The Milken Institute as Executive Vice President, Institutional Advancement . Mr. Herglotz is a decisive business, government, and non-profit executive with more than 25 years of experience managing and solving complex operational issues and exceeding financial objectives.

Learn more about Mr. Herglotz here.

This search was conducted and completed by Jane Howze and Sarah Mitchell.

Sharlene Jenner has joined The American Heart Association as SVP, Digital Marketing. Ms. Jenner is an award-winning senior executive with more than 18 years of experience.

Learn more about Ms. Jenner here.

This search was conducted and completed by Amanda K. Brady and Jean Lenzner.

Tangela Richter has joined Geico as General Counsel. Ms. Richter is a creative, results-focused adviser with exceptional problem solving, client service and communication skills, adept at delivering sound legal and business advice.

Learn more about Ms. Richter here.

This search was conducted and completed by John Lamar and Sarah Mitchell.

Anyone who has ever been involved with a not-for-profit will at some point be asked to serve on a search committee or lead a search committee’s search for a new CEO/President or senior officer. We have written previously about the responsibilities of search committee members and how candidates can prepare for a search committee interview but wanted to take a deeper look at the role of the Search Committee Chair. We turn to Steve Taylor, a leader in the not-for-profit community for nearly 30 years, who is currently serving as Executive Vice President and Chief Mission Officer of the Arthritis Foundation. Steve recently chaired the search committee for the President & CEO of the National Health Council which has been widely viewed as a well-run search with an outstanding result. Below, Steve answers the questions we are frequently asked as not-for-profits recruit using search committees.

How big should a search committee be?

I believe the ideal size is seven, including the Chairman who should also have a vote. You could possibly do nine or five, but frankly, if the Committee becomes too large, it can be hard to coordinate schedules. You have too many opinions in the discussions, and you want every voice to be heard. You’ll also want to make sure it’s an odd number; that way there is no tie.

Who should be on a search committee?

Much of it depends on the position. Ideally, one to three members of the Executive Committee should be on the Search Committee and supplement that with volunteers who represent different parts of the organization. I recommend looking at the various responsibilities of the position you are trying to fill. Which volunteers can best represent and understand these responsibilities? The key to a successful search committee is that you want members with perspective but who are not living in the past. On the other hand, you don’t want search committee members being so free-spirited they are substituting their vision for that of the Board’s.

The ideal Search Committee member understands the history of the organization as well as its future vision.

And that is what is so important when selecting volunteers to serve on a search committee: they need to be familiar [with] and embrace the Board’s vision for the organization and also represent different constituencies of the organization.

Should current employees sit on a search committee?

That is a question that many organizations wrestle with. Sometimes it can make sense, especially when you have long-term employees who understand the organization. But this is not a choice without challenges.

If there are internal candidates for the position, it can be difficult to ask a colleague [to] make an unbiased choice.
Secondly, a staff member on the Committee may not have the strategic view of the organization that a high-ranking volunteer or board member will have.
Thirdly, it can be sensitive for an employee to be involved in salary discussions involving the successful candidate.

What I typically recommend is that one of the Search Committee members serve as a liaison to a group of employees/staff. On the recent search I led for the National Health Council, I personally maintained contact with the senior leadership team. While I did not discuss individual candidates, I asked the search firm to solicit their opinions for the type of leaders we were seeking, and I communicated to them on the progress of the search.

Who selects the search firm, and what should be considered?

I can’t overemphasize the importance of a strong partnership with the search firm. You want it to be a partnership, not just a firm presenting resumes. The Chair should have meaningful input on selecting the search firm because they’ll be the one working [most] closely with them. Of course, the Search Committee reviews proposals and meets with a small number of finalists. But ultimately the Chair of the Search Committee should have a strong voice in selecting a search firm.

For me, it was critical that the search firm had experience in organizing and administratively providing infrastructure to the committee so that I and the Committee could focus on the candidates.

I also believe the Chair shouldn’t rely on the Search Committee or search firm to do all of the coordination. There will be times that it is important for the Chair to jump in to either facilitate meetings or deal with scheduling or personnel challenges. The search firm should be willing to do more than just conduct the search as many members of a search committee have full-time jobs.

I advise my colleagues running search committees to be very specific with what you would like the search firm to do.

Do you want them to:

Attend search committee meetings?
Set the agenda for search committee meetings?
Provide interview questions?

I believe you need a search firm to do anything the Search Committee and its Chairman cannot or do not want to do because of time restraints.

It is a given that a search firm needs to have a robust Rolodex, but I’m still trying to figure out how to evaluate that. [laughing] What you can evaluate is recent searches a search firm has conducted for similar positions. As we evaluated search firms, some listed searches they conducted more than a decade ago! That was a lifetime ago in the not-for-profit world.

And finally, I believe you need to find a search firm that is upfront and honest with you about who the lead staff will be—and that you have the opportunity to meet with that lead staff to ensure compatibility and understanding of the process you envision—before you finalize your selection on a firm.

What allowances did you make during COVID in the most recent search you chaired?

Overall, it worked out well. In certain ways, the process moved more efficiently given the Search Committee met by Zoom and the candidates were interviewed by the search firm and us for first-round interviews by Zoom. One advantage we had as a search committee is that we all knew each other—some better than others—but this familiarity allowed us to work together well virtually.

Once we narrowed the process to our finalists, we asked them to meet face to face, of course, social distancing, wearing masks, etc. with another search committee member and me. Despite adapting to video conferencing, meeting the candidate in person makes a big difference. To have a candidate being willing to invest the time, to travel to a meeting, meet a group of people, some in person, some virtually, was critical to the final steps of our process.

We were able to observe how they handled themselves in the middle of a pandemic, watch how they coordinated their presentation, and even how they arranged the papers on the conference table. In a virtual interview, you have no idea if the candidate has sticky notes all over their computer screen providing possible hints to questions. That was important to us because that’s what the job is going to be (ultimately): face-to-face meetings working with different constituencies and being able to communicate and think on their feet. Interestingly, I believe we would have ended up with the same candidate if we had conducted the search before COVID.

How do you, as a search committee chair, handle candidate withdrawals and surprises?

As a search committee chair or member, you understand that many of the candidates currently are in good positions, and you are hoping to attract them to your organization. You can’t get too nervous about that. It is part of the process. You reach for candidates, and some you attract, and some you lose. And if a candidate pulls out, I believe it’s better that they do it in the search process rather than later.

As for the second part of your question, as Chair, you have to be flexible, responsive, and nimble because issues arise that need to be acted on quickly. Several times, I had to reach out to Committee members individually to keep the process moving either because an issue arose on a Friday night or there was simply not the time to call a full committee meeting. You establish that at the beginning of the search so there is no misunderstanding. In every search, there may be small decisions made either by the chair or by a smaller group on the committee, because trying to get everyone together all the time isn’t possible, but ultimately the big decisions are made as a group.

How much time does it take to do a good job?

The time required ebbs and flows during the search. If you have a good search firm, as we did in using The Alexander Group, there’s less time initially because you allow them to do the search and trust their judgment on the candidates they’re presenting. The search committee chair is then free to focus on the higher-level items most important to finding the right candidate. Once the interview process is underway, you will need to be available for the search committee, search firm, [and] staff as the process unfolds. There is a significant time commitment required for the Chair. The organization needs someone who can make that time commitment because, if it is not a priority, you’ll never finish the search.

Who should be the Chair?

Choosing the right search committee chair is critical to a successful search. It needs to be a leader in the organization who understands its past but also understands the future vision of the organization. It does not have to be the current board chair. It could be a past board chair who might have more time because they’re not the current board chair. It is important that the chair can lead without supervision and is trusted by the board.