The rapid pace of change in European executive recruitment continues to accelerate. Twenty years ago, there were but a small handful of tried and trusted ways to recruit the right senior manager or executive. Today, the landscape is rather more complex. Our research among over 1,200 senior managers and executive across the UK and Continental Europe explores the methods organisations use to recruit, employee retention, priorities in executive recruitment, experience of job boards and recruitment agencies, social media, and measurement of recruitment.

1. THE HIRE IMPERATIVE
Executive recruitment tools, practices and
viewpoints in the UK and Continental Europe

2. In just the past three years,
“ LinkedIn has moved from
being used by 33% of
managers and executives
to search for a job,
and only 10% of hiring
managers to find them, to
almost universal usage
a”

3. Contents
Introduction 1
Survey Methodology 2
Determination of Process for Recruiting Management & Executive Roles 3
Priorities and Issues Driving Recruitment 5
Executive Transitions: Retention and Turnover 8
Employee Retention 10
Recruitment Methods 13
Philosophy of Search: Broad or Narrow? 17
Motivation of New Employees 18
Experience and Viewpoint on Job Boards 19
Viewpoint on and Experience of Executive Recruitment Agencies 21
Selection of Recruitment Service Provider 24
Social Media 25
Measuring Recruitment 28
Outlook on Future Executive / Management Hires 30
Contextual Factors 32
A War for Talent? 33
Conclusion 35

4. Introduction
The rapid pace of change in European newspaper used to be a business worth tens
clients, prospects and registered executive candidates
executive recruitment continues to accelerate. of millions of pounds annually. Today,
To inform our understanding of our clients’ habits and
preferences, in 2012 Executives Online surveyed our
Twenty years ago, there were but a small recruitment advertising is largely online and
handful of tried and trusted ways to recruit the generates less than £10 million per year.
right senior manager or executive: run a print
ad in the most relevant business or trade To inform our understanding of our clients’
journal; run a print ad in the national habits and preferences, in 2012 Executives
newspapers’ “appointments” section; or Online surveyed our clients, prospects and
engage an executive search firm. Job boards registered executive candidates. The online
were on the scene, but more actively used on questionnaire had over 30 questions
roles only up to middle management, for and covered:
technical positions and in some non-European
parts of the globe. • The methods their company or
organisation uses to recruit managers
In just the past three years, LinkedIn has
and executives
moved from being used by 33% of managers
• Employee retention methods
and executives to search for a job, and 10% of
hiring managers to find them, to almost • Their priorities in executive recruitment
universal usage. Even Facebook’s role is on • Their experience of job boards and
the rise among executives and the people executive recruitment agencies / suppliers
who hire them. Other tools and methods, • Use of social media
which a few years ago were in nascent stages,
• Measuring recruitment effectiveness / ROI
continue to grow. Large global brands are
taking executive recruitment in-house and
building their own “candidate communities”; Their answers are illuminating and in many
umbrella preferred supplier relationships cases surprising.
govern all recruitment suppliers in many
organisations; outsourcing and other tactics We hope you enjoy reading.
are also at work. In addition to the impact that
these new options are having within the
companies that choose them, the changes
have sent shockwaves through various entities
involved in sourcing talent. An example: James O’Brien
Recruitment advertising at one international Managing Director
1

5. Survey Methodology
Our surveys were conducted online in mid 2012,
among more than 1,200 senior executives across
Europe, who are either registered with us as
candidates for interim or permanent roles, or who
have used or enquired about our services. The
survey consisted of over 30 questions in which
respondents were asked their views on the priorities
and issues driving recruitment, executive retention
and turnover, various recruitment methods,
employee motivation, job boards, executive
recruitment service providers, social media,
measurement of recruitment, and their outlook for
the future.
The data were subsequently tabulated and analysed
to uncover insights by industry, role of responder,
country and performance in other metrics and
provide content for this narrative. This finished
report follows the order and structure of the
original survey.
2

6. Determination of Process for Recruiting Management & Executive Roles
Because of their importance to the organisation, executive hires are Asked to comment on whether the usual method is chosen via
often the result of a collaborative process between the hiring formal policies or on an ad-hoc basis, respondents answered more
manager (usually the person the role reports to) and the company’s strongly (in a ratio of 2:1) that policies were formal rather than ad
Human Resources function. Control of the process, however, can hoc. However, numerous comments also indicated that the process
vary. To understand where decision-making on the recruitment is flexible, and collaborative: “There are formal recruiting processes
process and method resides, we asked our clients, prospects and but the decision on the method to recruit is on a case by case
registered executive candidates who decides the method and basis at senior levels”, “[There is a] Formal underlying process with
process for that recruitment, once the company or organisation has flexibility depending on the role being recruited”, “Ultimately the
decided to recruit a senior role. decision lies with HR, but we always consult with the business to
ensure an appropriate solution is reached”,“We have a formal
In almost half of all companies, the HR / in-house recruitment group wide policy, driven by group procurement, to ensure most
function sets the process, with 47% of respondents answering that economic solutions are deployed. Flexibility exists to recognise
HR decides. In 36% of companies, the line / hiring manager specialists and experts, but only to the extent they reduce fees to
decides. Reflecting the collaborative process, fully 17% of the level of the rest following market review. Preferred supplier
respondents said that some other entity chooses how the panels are in place and strictly adhered to”.
recruitment will proceed. The comments given by respondents in
that 17% “Other” grouping indicate that, most often, the decision is There is a strong correlation between company size and the role of
made jointly by HR and line management, or driven directly from HR in setting the recruitment process. The larger the company, the
the top of the company, with the CEO or even the board deciding more likely it is that HR decides the method and process
how to proceed. In other situations, external service providers, such for recruitment.
as executive search consultants or external HR advisers,
set the tone.
Who decides recruitment process?
“...executive hires are
often the result of a
collaborative process Hiring Manager*
36%
between the hiring HR / In-house
Recruitment
manager (usually the Function
47%
person the role reports Other
17%
to) and the company’s
Human Resources
function.” * the person to whom the new employee will report
3

7. Determiner of recruitment process – by company size
100
23% 21% 13% 9% 10%
80
45% 36% 31% 29% 23%
60
Percentage
40
20 32% 43% 56% 62% 67%
0
0-50 51-250 251-1000 1001-5000 5001+
No. of Employees
Key
HR / In-house Recruitment Function
Hiring Manager
Other
That HR involvement increases with company size is not really The strength of HR in setting the process also varies by industry,
surprising, as the existence of a focused HR function (or even with respondents in the Healthcare / Medical, Industrial /
person) within a company requires a certain level of scale to justify Manufacturing, and Media / Marketing / Entertainment / Advertising
it. Smaller companies are less likely to even have a dedicated HR industries being more likely to report that HR decides the method
department, and therefore HR can’t play as much of a role in setting and process for executive recruitment. In the Business Services
the process for executive recruitment. However, the movement of sector, which has a higher proportion of smaller companies in our
decision-making away from the hiring manager is concerning. Less sample, the hiring manager is more likely to set the process.
than one in four hiring managers in bigger companies have the
primary say in how their people are recruited, which may have an
impact on their satisfaction with the process.
4

8. Priorities and Issues Driving Recruitment
Given a range of options related to desired employee profile, recruitment
process execution and cost, respondents were invited to state what they
considered to be the main priorities and issues that drove their
recruitment practices – or say what “other” items are important to them
(with no limits placed on the number of items they could indicate in their
response.) Their responses are summarised in the table below.
Main recruitment priorities – percentage of respondents citing
Finding people with the right cultural fit 56%
Finding people with the right skills 71%
Finding people with the right track 48%
record / prior experience
Finding good people managers / leaders 53%
Speed of recruitment 18%
Labour-intensiveness of recruitment 7%
Keeping up to date with current and evolving 6%
recruitment best practices
Cost of recruitment 24%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Respondents’ answers demonstrate their focus on the desired prioritised the process – its speed, labour-intensiveness, use of
outcome – that is, the identification and engagement of people particular new tools, or cost – over the outcome. Cost of recruitment
having the correct profile for the role in terms of skills, prior stands out as the “process point” that is higher on respondents’
experience, and cultural fit, with skills being the most important. minds than the others, with 24% indicating cost as a main priority
Encouragingly, relatively fewer respondents answered in a way that in recruitment.
In Executives Online’s earlier
research on permanent
Comparison between 2006 and 2012
recruitment, “Executive
Talent”, published in 2006, 50%
Finding people with the right cultural fit 56%
respondents were asked to 2006
Finding people with the right track record 33% 2012
indicate a similar set of / prior experience 48%
issues and priorities as Finding good people managers / leaders 27%
53%
important. Six years on, Speed of recruitment (time from initiation 18%
cultural fit and speed of of search to new employee starting) 18%
recruitment are unchanged Cost of recruitment 17%
24%
in how they appear in the
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
respondents’ ratings.
People management has leapt up in importance, with 53% of climate, clients are looking to de-risk each executive recruit by hiring
respondents mentioning it, versus 27% in 2006. Finding people who someone who has “been there, done that”, in terms of the
have more relevant prior experience is also more important, with requirements of the role. Transferable skills and experience are far
48% of respondents naming it a main priority, versus 33% in 2006. less in demand.) Cost of recruitment is also more on people’s
(Anecdotal reports across Executives Online’s recruitment minds, with 24% mentioning it in 2012, versus only
businesses bear this out. In the continuing recessionary / uncertain 17% in 2006.
5

9. Asked to identify the single main challenge or priority in recruiting
senior managers and executives for their company or organisation,
we see again the importance of profile, especially skills:
Single main recruitment challenge
Finding people with the right cultural fit 19%
Finding people with the right skills 32%
Finding people with the right track
18%
record / prior experience
Finding good people managers / leaders 21%
Speed of recruitment 4%
Labour-intensiveness of recruitment 1%
Keeping up to date with current and evolving 1%
recruitment best practices
Cost of recruitment 3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
There were no meaningful variations in these priorities by company Germany and the Republic of Ireland. Speed of recruitment is more
size or industry. We do, however, see variations in priorities and drivers important in Northern European countries and relatively less important
by country. Respondents from the United Kingdom, Belgium and The in the Southern European countries in our sample. The UK appears to
Netherlands were more likely to state that finding people with the right be the most cost-conscious of European nations in our study when it
cultural fit for the organisation is a main challenge or priority, with the comes to buying recruitment services, and the UK also notes the
quest for appropriate skills being less of an issue. In Germany, the labour- intensiveness of the recruitment process on internal staff as
Republic of Ireland, Italy and France finding people with the right skills more of a challenge – perhaps an opportunity for a service provider
is a relatively bigger driver of recruitment. The search for people / team with a cost-effective pricing model that takes more of the “production”
management abilities drives executive recruitment more in Belgium, time and effort of recruitment off its clients’ desks.
Recruitment challenges – variation by country
Speed of
recruitment Keeping up
Finding (time from to date with
people with initiation of current and
Finding Finding the right Finding search to Labour- evolving
people with people with track record good people new intensiveness recruitment
the right the right / prior managers / employee of best Cost of
cultural fit skills experience leaders starting) recruitment practices recruitment
Belgium & Luxembourg 61% 68% 46% 64% 24% 9% 7% 20%
France 58% 71% 43% 52% 15% 4% 7% 23%
Germany 53% 77% 49% 58% 25% 6% 8% 24%
Republic of Ireland 59% 75% 53% 59% 20% 8% 0% 27%
Italy 41% 79% 41% 48% 9% 4% 6% 25%
The Netherlands 67% 64% 54% 42% 16% 2% 5% 15%
UK 68% 67% 56% 54% 25% 14% 7% 31%
Average 56% 71% 48% 53% 18% 7% 6% 24%
6

10. Finally, it is interesting to note how priorities vary according to the people with the right cultural fit, finding people with the right track
role the respondent occupies in the organisation. Asked to name record and prior experience, speed of recruitment, the labour-
any and all main challenges and priorities they perceived in intensiveness of recruitment, and cost of recruitment as main
recruiting senior managers and executives, HR managers had a challenges and priorities in recruiting senior managers and
much longer list. Their focus on and awareness of the recruitment executives, compared to their colleagues in line or functional
process and its vagaries are generally higher than that of their non- management roles, or non-executive directors.
HR colleagues. By large margins, more of them mentioned finding
Recruitment challenges – variation by role of respondent
Speed of
recruitment Keeping up
Finding (time from to date with
people with initiation of current and
Finding Finding the right Finding search to Labour - evolving
people with people with track record good people new intensiveness recruitment
the right the right / prior managers / employee of best Cost of
cultural fit skills experience leaders starting) recruitment practices recruitment
HR 67% 71% 59% 56% 29% 18% 6% 32%
Line manager 60% 70% 49% 53% 16% 8% 6% 25%
Functional manager 53% 72% 45% 54% 19% 6% 6% 23%
Non-executive director 47% 73% 51% 55% 18% 4% 5% 24%
Average 56% 71% 48% 53% 18% 7% 6% 24%
“Line managers were This heightened awareness of all the challenges and priorities that
can emerge in executive recruitment is probably to be expected from
more likely than their the function that bears responsibility for attracting and retaining talent.
HR colleagues to cite Asked to name the single main challenge they saw, the HR and line /
functional managers’ answers were more similar, with the most
finding relevant prior important issues emerging as profile elements of the desired hire,
such as skills, experience, culture and people management abilities.
experience / track Line managers were more likely than their HR colleagues to cite
finding relevant prior experience / track record in the target employee
record in the target as their most important priority, whereas HR managers tended to
view the highest recruitment priority as “skills” related. Non-executive
employee as their directors rated people management ability as the most important
most important priority” aspect in focusing recruitment – at a rate more than double that of
HR managers and 50% more often than the line and functional
managers. Very few respondents mentioned cost or speed of
recruitment as the single main priority, but HR managers were twice
as likely to do so as respondents from other backgrounds.
7

11. Executive Transitions: Retention and Turnover
If employees stay in the company or organisation and are applied to its work in such a way that they are
productive and satisfied, recruiting replacements for leavers becomes less of an imperative. On the other
hand, sometimes it is best for the organisation and the employee if they part company. We asked several
questions about these issues, and the methods and practices companies are using to retain their
managers and executives.
its work in such a way that they are productive and satisfied, recruiting
Asked whether they have been challenged with retaining valued executives and management staff;
If employees stay in the company or organisation and are applied to
exiting under-performing staff; downsizing / redundancies; and succession planning, roughly 40% of
respondents indicated that yes, these were challenges they had faced.
Challenges faced in retaining or exiting staff – percentage of respondents citing
Retaining valued
executives Difficulties in exiting Downsizing / Succession
replacements for leavers becomes less of an imperative.
and management staff under-performing staff redundancies planning
43% 42% 37% 37%
Asked which of these was the single most challenging issue, retention and exiting under-performers
emerged as the more prevalent challenges.
Challenges faced in retaining or exiting staff –
percentage of respondents citing as main problem
Retaining valued
executives Difficulties in exiting Downsizing / Succession
and management staff under-performing staff redundancies planning
30% 27% 22% 18%
Respondents could also indicate a challenge other than the four choices above. Among other
challenges related to a company’s ability to keep and maintaining the workforce it wants, respondents
mentioned “getting executives working with each other as a team”, “adapting management to new
challenges”, “management staff not supported by general direction from board”, “defining executive
roles”, as well as the launch and exploration of a new business necessitating different skills – all of which
have an impact on staff retention, engagement and performance.
8

12. There were no meaningful variations in perception of these issues by company size or by industry,
although we do see a correlation between employment tenure by company size and industry. Generally,
the larger the company, the longer the tenure. The smallest companies’ average tenure rate, at 5.9 years,
is well beneath the average of 7.2 years, and the largest companies’ average tenure sits well above
average at 9 years.
Average tenure of management and executive employees
by size of company (in years)
0-50 employees 5.9
51-250 employees 7.6
251-1000 employees 7.5
1001-5000 employees 7.1
Over 5000 employees 9.0
Average 7.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Years
We also observe variations in tenure by industry, with companies in the Media / Marketing / Entertainment /
Advertising and IT / Telecoms / Technology sectors having shorter employee tenure than companies in
the Industrial / Manufacturing, Financial Services / Banking or Building / Construction sectors.
Average tenure of management and executives by industry sector (in years)
Business Services 6.4
Building / Construction 7.5
Financial Services / Banking 7.8
Healthcare / Medical 7.2
Industrial / Manufacturing 8.4
Media / Marketing / Entertainment / Advertising 5.5
Professional Services (Law, Accountancy) 6.7
Retail / Distribution 7.0
IT / Telecoms / Technology 5.8
Transport / Logistics 6.6
Average 7.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Years
9

13. Employee Retention
Is employee turnover structural, or due to the actions taken by particular companies to secure the loyalty of
their staff? It seems that practices designed to retain employees, including training, deferred compensation
in the form of deferred bonuses and stock options, career planning (identifying optimal next roles in the
organisation) and offering flexible working (such as work from home, reduced working week, flexible /
variable hours, etc.) do have an impact. Companies in the lower quartiles in terms of their reported
employee tenure are less likely to have such incentives and programmes in place to encourage loyalty.
Programmes in place to retain staff, by level of tenure achieved
Training, mentoring, Deferred Career Flexible
coaching compensation planning working
Bottom quartile 47% 46% 37% 36%
Lower middle quartile 62% 54% 39% 43%
Upper middle quartile 53% 54% 41% 39%
Top quartile 55% 54% 52% 40%
Respondents’ perceptions of which of these is the most effective, however, are mixed.
Programmes cited as most effective in retaining staff, by level of tenure achieved
Training, mentoring, Deferred Career Flexible
coaching compensation planning working
Bottom quartile 17% 36% 24% 11%
Lower middle quartile 18% 28% 27% 21%
Upper middle quartile 15% 34% 27% 15%
Top quartile 14% 25% 35% 17%
Deferred compensation is perceived as the most effective practice to encourage employee loyalty by
companies that achieve all levels of employee tenure. Among the companies of respondents reporting
the longest tenures, however, the respondents believe other factors – notably career planning – are
producing the result.
10

14. If we look at the results by country, we see that across all countries in which survey respondents were
located, retention and exiting under-performers were more likely to be the most challenging issues,
compared to managing redundancies or succession planning. However, in some countries, either
retention or exiting under-performers is more prevalent as the most major challenge.
Challenges in retaining / transitioning staff, by country
Retaining valued
executives and Difficulties in exiting Downsizing / Succession
management staff under-performing staff redundancies planning
Belgium and Luxembourg 40% 22% 19% 18%
France 28% 32% 19% 15%
Germany 30% 32% 17% 20%
Republic of Ireland 23% 20% 30% 25%
Italy 29% 27% 26% 18%
The Netherlands 32% 22% 31% 15%
UK 30% 31% 18% 19%
In France, Germany, the Republic of Ireland, Italy and the UK, approximately equal proportions of
respondents rated retention and exiting under-performers as the most challenging issue. In the Benelux
countries, retention issues dominate compared to exiting under-performers. We suspect that the
difficulties encountered in exiting under-performers may correlate to the different employee protection
laws in place in these countries. There may also be cultural drivers at work, with employee mobility being
greater and generally viewed as a desirable thing among the working populations in some countries.
Employment tenure also varies by country:
Average tenure of management and executive employees by country (in years)
Belgium & Luxembourg 7.9
France 8.8
Germany 8.2
Republic of Ireland 7.8
Italy 7.5
The Netherlands 6.5
UK 5.9
Average 7.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Years
11

15. We also asked survey respondents to describe how, or if, they saw look outside; but this may mean the organisation has failed to
the relationship between external recruitment and internal anticipate the change and looking for new talent outside may only
promotion changing. Their comments put some colour behind the be a band-aid treatment. “
figures, with the consensus being that as there are valid reasons
for both recruitment and internal promotion and that organisations “You have to measure the potential of internal and faithful people,
must do both successfully and master the challenges associated giving them chances to develop their skills. But it isn't less
with each in order to thrive: important to hire new people with wide experience outside the
company in order to balance continuity with ‘fresh air’.”
“All ways to get in touch with potential high value managers must
be explored. So internal ways are still valuable to consider but A recurrent theme was the notion that internal promotion is only
compared to many other external sources.” possible when the organisation has strong people development
plans in place, and that such programmes have too often fallen
“Always promote internally as it carries less risk / more success under the chopping block in cost reduction schemes – thus
unless the business landscape has changed and requires a new rendering the internal talent pool less suitable for promotion:
strategy and therefore new people.”
“As companies are leaner, there is less choice internally and the
“Companies need a regular injection of outstanding talent from the development of staff is less.”
outside to keep fresh and to perpetually challenge themselves and
their ‘eternal truths’.” “Companies in this period are folded upon themselves.
Companies recruit external staff only for contingency reasons.
“Both [recruitment and retention] are investigated. Mostly for high Companies are not investing in talent at this time.”
positions is it better incorporating someone from outside, bringing
other practices and know-how.” “Companies who skimp on internal training and development need
to resort to the external recruitment of senior people at an overall
“As far as I am concerned, the question of internal versus external loss of efficiency and profitability.”
remains. The challenge will always be if internal: how to gain the
respect of the people you manage.” “Lack of training, mentoring and succession planning has
destroyed the promotional ladder. The economic climate dictates
“A company needs to do both. To use a sporting analogy, most cutbacks and all non-core activities suffer.”
successful teams have a youth system and a transfer policy.“
“External recruitment is a cost but also an enlarged source of value.
“During a crisis I consider it important to engage external Internal recruitment is a value if a company has a good school of
recruitment of the highest experience (older candidates). Internal management (ramping processes, succession plans) otherwise is
promotion doesn't give new ideas.” a way to pump up resources not yet fit and ready for these roles.”
“[I am] Erring more towards internal promotion, which I believe is a “[It] Depends on the organisation’s capability: some organisations
policy most companies should follow. It also demonstrates to have talent development capabilities, some simply go to market
others that performance is recognised.” when the need arises.”
“[You] Need a balance depending on the organisation. We are “Due to the recession, fewer internal staff with the appropriate skills
growing globally at 40% year on year. Promoting from within was are available. The best have gone, as they were too expensive and
great when we were a young UK business, but we need more global were not replaced like-for-like (reduced salary and quality).”
experience from new senior managers, which cannot always be
developed internally, until we become more established globally.” “Succession planning is becoming more difficult as all levels of
talent are moving. External recruitment is good for cultural
“[I’m] Not sure it is changing. Our policy is always to promote from innovation and enhancement.”
within if the talent exists internally – if not, we look outside.”
“This depends on the evolutionary stage of an organisation. If the
talent does not exist internally to handle the task, the option is to
12

16. Recruitment Methods
Survey respondents were asked to rank the effectiveness of various In terms of effectiveness, respondents rank executive search or
tools and methods they used to recruit senior managers and recruitment firms or agencies and employee referrals the most effective
executives into their companies or organisations (or to indicate that way to recruit senior managers and executives. More than half of
they don’t use them). respondents reported that executive search or recruitment firms (either
“retained” or “contingent”) are “Effective” or “Highly Effective” at
All of these tools and methods are broadly used by responding delivering successful hires.
companies, with at least 77% of companies reporting using them.
Employee referrals are used by virtually all companies, with only 7% of By contrast, respondents were far more likely to rate job boards, job
respondents reporting non-usage of employee referrals to generate postings on the company’s own website, print advertising, conferences
candidates for internal roles. or online CV databases as “Not Effective” or “Not Very Effective”.
Effectiveness ratings of recruitment tools and methods
Not Effective Not Very Effective Effective Highly Effective Do Not Use
Job board
13% 31% 29% 7% 22%
advertising
Job posting on own
14% 34% 27% 8% 17%
company's website
Social media (LinkedIn, Twitter,
10% 27% 28% 11% 23%
Facebook, Xing)
Retained executive recruitment
4% 14% 40% 27% 13%
or search firm
Contingent (non-retained)
6% 21% 37% 15% 18%
executive recruitment firm
Employee
4% 23% 38% 26% 7%
referrals
Print advertising in newspapers
14% 31% 25% 6% 22%
or trade magazines
Attending conferences, events
16% 33% 21% 6% 22%
and trade shows
Online CV databases (other than
9% 32% 24% 8% 25%
LinkedIn or other social media)
Recruitment methods and tools rated effective or not
Effective / Not / Not Very
Highly Effective Effective
Job board advertising 35% 43%
Job posting on own company’s website 34% 48%
Social media 38% 37%
Retained executive recruitment or search firm 67% 18%
Contingent (non-retained) executive recruitment firm 52% 26%
Employee referrals 63% 28%
Print advertising 31% 45%
Attending conferences, events and trade shows 27% 49%
Online CV databases 33% 41%
13

17. Asked which method or source they found to be the most effective of all at providing qualified
candidates who go on to be interviewed and hired, respondents reported that employee referrals
and retained executive search firms emerge as the most effective. The top three recruitment
resources or methods were recruitment firms of any type – retained, with 34% of respondents
ranking them most effective; and contingent, with 9% ranking them most effective – and employee
referrals, which 25% rate the most effective.
Recruitment tools and methods rated “most effective”
Contingent
(non- Print
Social Media Retained Retained) Advertising Online CV
Job Posting (LinkedIn, Executive Executive in Attending databases
on your own Twitter, Recruitment Recruitment newspapers conferences, (other than
Job board company's Facebook, or Search or Search Employee or trade events and LinkedIn or
advertising web site Xing) firm firm Referrals magazines trade shows other social)
7% 5% 7% 34% 9% 25% 3% 3% 4%
Asked which they found to be the least effective, respondents’ answers were more democratically
distributed across all the options, with each option garnering between 4% and 17% of the negative
ratings. However, even in these ratings we see the continued reliance on and relatively positive
experience of using recruitment service providers, which barely figure in this “least effective”
category – only 4% of respondents rated contingent recruitment firms the least effective way to find
good candidates, and only 7% rated retained firms the least effective.
Recruitment tools and methods rated “least effective”
Contingent
(non- Print
Social Media Retained Retained) Advertising Online CV
Job Posting (LinkedIn, Executive Executive in Attending databases
on your own Twitter, Recruitment Recruitment newspapers conferences, (other than
Job board company's Facebook, or Search or Search Employee or trade events and LinkedIn or
advertising web site Xing) firm firm Referrals magazines trade shows other social)
14% 12% 11% 7% 4% 10% 16% 17% 9%
These findings show that print advertising certainly seems to have had its day, as well as using
face-to-face events to identify candidates, as their effective ratings skew towards the “not
effective” end of the spectrum.
The broad distribution of effectiveness ratings backs up the fact that most companies continue to
use a range of recruitment tools and methods to identify senior managers and executives to hire.
There is no “magic bullet”, although compared to “do it yourself” resources like job board
advertising, the use of a company’s own website to advertise jobs, social media and recruitment
service providers are rated more highly.
14

18. There were variations in viewpoints, depending on the respondent’s role in the organisation, with
the opinions of Human Resources professionals being more definitive (concentrated) in their like
or dislike of particular recruitment resources and tools. Compared to their colleagues in line or
functional management, HR managers have more faith in the effectiveness of social media and
retained executive recruitment firms in providing qualified candidates who go on to be interviewed
and hired. HR managers are less likely to believe contingent recruitment firms and employee
referrals to be the most effective. Non-executive directors have the most positive view of social
media of all their colleagues, perhaps because of the importance of such channels in building the
type of portfolio career they are, by definition, engaged in.
Recruitment tool or method rated “most effective”, by role of respondent
HR Line Manager Functional Mgr Non-Exec Director Average
Job board
9% 6% 6% 2% 7%
advertising
Job posting on own
6% 4% 5% 7% 5%
company's website
Social media (LinkedIn, Twitter,
13% 7% 6% 20% 7%
Facebook, Xing)
Retained executive recruitment
39% 36% 35% 29% 34%
or search firm
Contingent (non-retained)
3% 8% 9% 7% 9%
executive recruitment firm
Employee
16% 29% 24% 20% 25%
referrals
Print advertising in newspapers
6% 3% 3% 5% 3%
or trade magazines
Attending conferences, events
3% 3% 3% 0% 3%
and trade shows
Online CV databases (other than
3% 2% 6% 7% 4%
LinkedIn or other social media)
By company size, respondents’ answers conformed very closely to the overall average, with just a
few exceptions. Smaller companies are somewhat more likely than larger companies to believe
employee referrals are the most effective tool or resource. Also, smaller companies are less likely
to view retained executive recruitment firms as the most effective.
“Non-executive directors have the most positive view of
social media of all their colleagues, perhaps because of
the importance of such channels in building the type of
portfolio career they are, by definition, engaged in.”
15

19. Looking at the results by country, there were some interesting variations. Retained recruitment
providers were more likely to be viewed as the most effective way to identify good candidates in
the Benelux countries than in other countries. Employee referrals are regarded as less effective in
Belgium and Germany, and more effective in the UK, compared to other countries. Print
advertising is least well regarded in Belgium, France and The Netherlands. In Germany, the
Republic of Ireland and The Netherlands, respondents were more likely to view social media as the
most effective recruitment tool or resource.
Recruitment method rated “most effective”, by country
Belgium & Republic of
Luxembourg France Germany Ireland Italy Netherlands UK Average
Job board
6% 9% 8% 3% 8% 0% 7% 7%
advertising
Job posting on own
11% 5% 4% 6% 6% 6% 3% 5%
company's website
Social media (LinkedIn, Twitter,
7% 7% 13% 11% 8% 11% 5% 7%
Facebook, Xing)
Retained executive recruitment
44% 37% 30% 33% 31% 46% 32% 34%
or search firm
Contingent (non-retained)
5% 7% 12% 17% 7% 9% 10% 9%
executive recruitment firm
Employee
16% 26% 19% 28% 25% 20% 30% 25%
referrals
Print advertising in newspapers
2% 0% 3% 3% 3% 2% 5% 3%
or trade magazines
Attending conferences, events
2% 3% 4% 0% 2% 6% 3% 3%
and trade shows
Online CV databases (other than
6% 2% 4% 0% 6% 0% 3% 4%
LinkedIn or other social media)
“Retained recruitment providers were
more likely to be viewed as the most
effective way to identify good
candidates in the Benelux countries
than in other countries.”
16

20. Philosophy of Search: Broad or Narrow?
Asked which of the following statements they most agreed with, “In sourcing management and
executive talent, it is most important to consider the broadest audience of potential candidates, to
identify people within that who are most likely to possess all the required attributes,” or “In sourcing
management and executive talent, it is most important to engage only within a small universe of
potential candidates already well regarded by our company or our recruitment partner,” respondents
were evenly mixed in their answers, with 52% supporting a broad approach.
Examining respondents’ comments in response to this question illuminates some of the underlying issues
in greater detail. Many respondents commented on the desirability of the recruitment company performing
the filtering to reduce a broad pool of applicants to the best handful, but observed that it can be difficult to
communicate the finer points of fit for a role that makes this possible. Some commented on the fact that
casting a wide net produces a screening burden, but that this is worth it to uncover the right candidate.
Others pointed to the narrowness of their specific industry making a focused approach quite effective.
“For an executive hire, many people will be known, but it would be a folly to assume only those ‘known’
represent the potential pool and I would expect active and original research which would complement
our organisational knowledge.”
company performing the filtering to reduce a broad pool of applicants
“Many respondents commented on the desirability of the recruitment
“The problem is getting recruiting companies to understand the filters.”
communicate finer points of fit for a role that makes this possible.”
“We operate within a specific sector and network widely, so we know who we would wish to recruit from
within our network.”
to the best handful, but observed that it can be difficult to
“Recruitment partners tend not to fully understand the brief and to employ people who are sales driven,
which is not in the best interest of either the company or candidate, when they do not fully understand
what they are looking at in a CV.”
“The search for talent should initially be broad, narrowing down to key prospects and eventually
selecting talent with proven records / achievements and the capacity to play within company teams and
their dynamics.”
“Quality is more important than quantity. It's important for the recruitment agent to find a way to provide
value that the client cannot get by ‘going direct’ or DIY through e.g. social media – for example,
knowledge of the candidates, skills required, state of the industry etc.”
“Looking at the broadest audience is usually time consuming and expensive. There is also the element
of competition to hire the best candidates. It is better to target a pool of known performers with good
cultural fit with our organisation.”
“There is a trade-off between who is known within the small pool and considered to be safe, as opposed
to the risks associated with unknown candidates – who may bring more value, but who also may not be
able to succeed as well as experience or CV suggests.”
“It gives added value to also consider a broader audience, since these candidates can provide another
and more unbiased view / approach.”
“When looking for unique, non-cv related skills we need to see / view a lot of candidates. When looking
for more widely-held skills, you can employ database searches and narrow the list of candidates.”
“Recruitment firms tend to narrow down candidates too much and are willing to reduce their effort by reducing
choice and options. The focus is too much on skills and past experience, which eliminates strong candidates
from other industries or functions. The focus should be rather on fit, potential and honest ambition.”
17

21. Motivation of New Employees
Making a move to a new role is a decision no manager or executive
undertakes lightly. Many factors interact to make an opportunity
appealing – issues ranging from financial compensation, flexible
working, lifestyle features such as length of commute, as well as the
fundamental attributes of the role in terms of the interest, challenge and
development potential it offers.
We asked our survey respondents to rank certain factors in terms of the
influence in a prospective employee accepting a job offer in their
company or organisation, where 1 = the most influential factor,
and 7 = not influential at all.
Generally our survey respondents felt that the issues most tightly
connected with the job itself provided the dominant motivations for
making a move: its challenge, the opportunity to learn and grow, and
how much the prospective employee felt he or she would enjoy the role.
Remuneration is the second strongest perceived motivator, with other
attributes of the job like flexible working featuring less strongly in
candidates’ deliberations.
Average ranking of factors affecting acceptance of new job offer
Scale: 1 = most influential, 7 = not influential at all
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Level of remuneration 2.6
Challenge of the role 2.4
Enjoyment of the role 2.9
Opportunity to learn / grow 3.2
Flexible working practices
such as work from home, 4.3
flexible / reduced hours, etc.
Work / life balance 4.0
Commute / geography 4.3
18

22. Experience and Viewpoint on Job Boards
Job boards – websites created specifically for the advertising of jobs – have been a prominent feature
of the recruitment landscape since the mid 1990s. Newspapers were among the first organisations to
launch job boards, taking the classified job advertising they’d always sold and providing it in the online
space, followed by sites like Monster, Hotjobs and others – dedicated online businesses not backed by
“bricks and mortar” companies.
Anyone who worked in recruitment will remember the anguish over the concept of “disintermediation”:
the idea that efficient, data-driven online sites would enable employers and candidates to connect with
each other directly, and thus make recruitment service providers obsolete.
through and recruiters calling us. It's better to focus on
“There are a lot of people looking for jobs. Advertising
on Monster simply results in hundreds of CVs coming
What happened instead is that the ease with which employers and candidates could connect directly,
actually made recruitment service providers more relevant. Despite rich databases of candidate
registration data backing up the job boards, they still produce, in most cases, a surplus of imperfect
the best ‘pre-qualifying’ routes to candidates.”
candidates. In reality employers don’t want to see a long list of candidates for a role, they want to see a
small number of highly suitable candidates.
Far from being made obsolete, members of the recruitment industry adopted job boards as their own
and began to use them to provide a better and more effective service to clients. Recruiters became
expert at writing online adverts to attract the right sorts of candidates and used this to remove the
screening and filtering burden – which still requires human eyes and assessment – from the
employers. Job adverts run by recruitment companies therefore dominate the online space in the same
way that recruiter ads used to dominate the broadsheet newspapers.
The obsolescence wrought by the emergence of job boards has not been of the recruitment industry,
but rather of the print medium as a recruitment advertising channel. This is a trend mirrored elsewhere,
as advertising of all types has moved from print publications to online. Online advertising is highly
trackable via click-through rates, cost per visit, cost per CV and associated measures, and this has
enabled advertisers to measure their spend against the return they get. This focus on return has
prompted a collapse in pricing, as advertising has moved from print, where measurement is more
difficult, to online, where precise measurement is possible and the willingness to pay can be matched
to the return. Recruitment advertising at one international newspaper used to be a business worth tens
of millions of pounds annually; today, recruitment advertising is largely online and generates less than
£10 million per year.
Twenty years on, how do hiring managers view job boards? We asked our survey participants, with
respect to their experience of job board adverts, which three statements they most strongly agree with.
Attitudes and views on job boards – percentage of respondents agreeing
Most job board applicants are a fit for the role advertised, 15%
and we proceed to interview them
Job boards deliver value for money 20%
Job boards produce too many candidates 45%
Job boards produce so many unqualified applicants as to
impose a screening burden on company staff 42%
Most job board applicants are not a fit for the role advertised 39%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Less than 20% of respondents had positive things to say about job boards, and upwards of 40% of
respondents registered negative comments.
19

23. Respondents’ views of job boards varied by country, but did not deviate from the universal view, which
is predominantly negative. Compared to the European average, job boards are less well-regarded in
Ireland, The Netherlands and the UK, whereas in Germany, France and Italy they enjoy a more
favourable reputation.
Attitude and views of job boards, by country
Belgium & Republic of
Luxembourg France Germany Ireland Italy Netherlands UK Average
Most job board applicants are
a fit for the role advertised, and 18% 18% 24% 11% 19% 5% 8% 15%
we proceed to interview them
Job boards deliver 20% 22% 29% 16% 21% 15% 17% 20%
value for money
Job boards produce
49% 43% 47% 42% 39% 35% 51% 45%
too many candidates
Job boards produce so many
unqualified applicants as to
impose a screening burden on 42% 34% 40% 42% 37% 36% 54% 42%
company staff
Most job board applicants are
40% 32% 42% 42% 36% 33% 45% 39%
not a fit for the role advertised
“Compared to the European average, job
boards are less well-regarded in Ireland,
The Netherlands and the UK...”
20

24. Viewpoint on and Experience of Executive Recruitment Agencies
The recruitment industry, including executive recruitment, remains highly fragmented. In the UK alone,
there are thousands of executive recruitment companies, ranging from “one man bands” of
independent recruiters and small boutiques up to major listed corporations employing thousands of
recruitment consultants globally. As in any service industry, the nature and attributes of services
provided vary by firm – according to its declared business process – and the individual within the firm
providing the service.
At a meta level, pricing and service fall into two main categories, retained and contingent service, with
each having its pros and cons. Retained executive and management recruiters typically work on an
exclusive basis, levy a fee to commence a search, occasionally charge fees at particular milestones
along the way, and finally charge a completion fee when the new employee signs contracts or starts
work. Contingent recruitment firms will work in competition with other agencies and don’t tend to
charge in advance, earning their fee only as and when the chosen candidate starts work. Too much
competition in the form of multiple agencies working on one role can create confusion in the talent
marketplace, with candidates not knowing which agency to apply through, and with an over-advertised
role looking tarnished (and perhaps a bit desperate). Commitment and competition are both desirable,
yet are opposing dynamics in the recruitment process. Knowing this, some employers make use of
both types of agencies on a role-by-role basis.
We asked our survey respondents which factors were important (and most important) to them when
choosing a recruitment service provider.
Asked to pick any factor that was important to them, respondents’ answers indicated that speed of
service, the track record of the recruitment provider in the role’s function or industry, and a personal
relationship with the recruiter were important to the largest proportion of respondents. Pricing and
associated terms and conditions were also important factors.
Factors important in selection of recruitment provider – percentage of respondents mentioning
Speed of service 51%
Price 47%
Proven track record in function / industry 56%
Personal relationship: I know and trust the individual
recruiter who will be doing the work
58%
Corporate reputation: I know and trust the recruitment firm 38%
Size of talent pool 24%
Guarantee (commitment to restart search at no further
cost if the employee leaves early in his / her tenure) 42%
My company has a Preferred Supplier List (PSL) which 15%
determines the suppliers I can use for executive recruitment
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
21

25. Asked to indicate the single most important factor, the survey participants’ responses prioritised a
proven track record and personal relationship whereas speed of service, price and guarantee fell away
as secondary, tertiary or lower priorities.
Factors important in selection of recruitment provider –
percentage of respondents mentioning as “most important” factor
Speed of service 9%
Price 6%
Proven track record in function / industry 28%
Personal relationship: I know and trust the individual
recruiter who will be doing the work
30%
Corporate reputation: I know and trust the recruitment firm 9%
Size of talent pool 6%
Guarantee (commitment to restart search at no further
cost if the employee leaves early in his / her tenure) 7%
My company has a Preferred Supplier List (PSL) which 4%
determines the suppliers I can use for executive recruitment
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The question about recruitment Preferred Supplier Lists (PSLs) is interesting, with 15% of respondents
indicating that their company operates a PSL, but only 4% reporting that it completely restricts their
choice of which recruitment provider to work with.
More than half of respondents whose companies operate PSLs report them as ineffective in delivering
quality candidates and reducing cost. In the current economic environment, more respondents expect
PSLs to strengthen than weaken in the future. Asked whether they love or hate their PSL, respondents
reporting that they hate it outnumbered respondents who like and support their PSL.
Views on recruitment Preferred Supplier Lists (PSLs)
Effective at delivering quality candidates 44%
Effective at reducing cost 32%
Expect to use PSL suppliers more,
or more exclusively, in the future 14%
Expect to use PSL suppliers less (have more leeway to use
non-PSL suppliers) in the future 10%
I like having a recruitment PSL to work with 16%
I hate having to work with a recruitment PSL 22%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
22

26. The lack of an overwhelming view about PSLs in response to any of these statements, together with
respondents comments about PSLs seems to indicate that, with respect to their relevance and
effectiveness, it very much depends on whether the companies on the PSL can understand the hiring
manager’s requirements and preferences, and use that understanding to screen and vet candidates to
produce a quality short list of relevant candidates.
“A PSL is a good idea but it can also be limiting.”
“A personal relationship – knowing and trusting the individual
“ A PSL doesn’t allow more than one recruitment firm and one size does not fit all.”
important determinant in choosing a recruitment provider...”
recruiter who will be doing the work – was the single most
“Not necessarily effective at delivering best quality candidates if the price is too low.”
“They have a tendency to become complacent and focus on the individual within the company with
whom they have a relationship, rather than understanding the recruiting manager's requirements.”
“While the majority of faith is placed in the PSL, it is always good to have the flexibility to use non-PSL
suppliers, if necessary.”
“Working with a PSL of proven competency ultimately reduces costs and enhances speed of delivery.”
23

27. Selection of Recruitment Service Provider
We were interested to understand how hiring managers (who are not constrained by a PSL) find a
recruitment provider to help them. Personal recommendations are very important, as might be
expected in any service industry. A personal relationship – knowing and trusting the individual recruiter
who will be doing the work – was the single most important determinant in choosing a recruitment
provider, outranking the track record of the firm, pricing, speed of service and other important
attributes, whether the respondent was asked to indicate any factors that had importance, or only the
one most important factor. Lacking an existing personal relationship with a recruiter, most respondents
would seek to gather the next best thing: the assurance from a trusted friend or colleague who did
have a positive relationship with a recruiter that the particular recruiter would do good work.
How to find a recruitment provider
Do a web search via Google or another search engine 14%
Ask a friend or colleague for a recommendation 52%
Search otherwise online (e.g. LinkedIn) 15%
Trade or professional body (e.g. REC, CIPD) 13%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Deeper into the process of engaging a recruiter, the importance of relationship emerges again, with an
interview of the recruiter and references from his or her clients emerging as more important than work
product (sample CVs), pitches or in-market testing (putting multiple recruiters to work on the same role).
How to qualify a recruitment provider
Ask for some example CVs 9%
Interview several suppliers and choose the one who is most
knowledgeable and seems likely to be the most effective
31%
Ask multiple firms to pitch for the work 14%
in a formal presentation
Take references 31%
Put multiple agencies to work on the role
12%
and see who delivers
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
“Deeper into the process of
engaging a recruiter, the
importance of relationship
emerges again...”
24

28. Social Media
Following the entry of job boards in the 1990s, the landscape of online job board with strong social features, were the next most popular sites,
tools to support executive recruitment underwent a major with 36% of respondents indicating they use each of these sites.
transformation again a decade later, with the emergence of social and However, among senior managers and executives, Facebook remains
professional networking sites that not only contained candidate much more a social tool for family and friends, and is seen far less as
profiles and enabled transactions (like applying for a job), but also a professional networking medium. Only 12% report using Facebook
modelled and supported the relationships between people. Early sites in their professional lives. All social networking sites, even the most
with a more purely social slant – like SixDegrees.com in 1997; Friends career oriented, showed a drop-off between any usage and
Reunited, which debuted in 2000; and Friendster in 2002 – were professional usage, but the largest drop-off rate is with Facebook,
followed by LinkedIn in 2002 and Facebook in 2004, which became indicating that fewer users see a professional application for its
the largest social networking site in the world. LinkedIn remains the capabilities and features. Doubts remain in many respondents’ minds
dominant professional networking site globally, an indispensable tool about whether all the social platforms are effective for professional
for managers and executives seeking their next role, and, increasingly, networking. As one respondent commented, “I am still not convinced
for the employers who hire them. that social media is a good environment for important professional
business, especially where subject matter expertise is relevant. The
By 2012 LinkedIn has become virtually ubiquitous among European problem is that once topics are opened up for discussion, it is difficult
senior managers’ and executives’ tools for professional networking, to eliminate noise.”
with 90% of respondents using LinkedIn. Facebook and Experteer, a
Which of the following social networking sites do you use?
100%
90% key
Percentage of Respondents Using
80% 2012
60%
40% 36% 36%
24%
20%
20% 16%
0% LinkedIn Facebook Xing Twitter Viadeo Experteer
Which of the following social networking sites do you use IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL LIFE?
100%
87% key
Percentage of Respondents Using
80% 2012
60%
40%
26%
20% 16% 18%
12%
7%
0% LinkedIn Facebook Xing Twitter Viadeo Experteer
25