|
AI-driven executive search. Same trusted expertise, now amplified.
Know More
The part clients see is the shortlist. The part that determines whether the shortlist is any good happens weeks earlier, in defining what the role actually requires and mapping who in the market has genuinely done it. A search that starts with a job description written by committee and ends with four people who were available is not a search. It is a filtered inbox.
Agreeing what the role must deliver in its first two years, and which requirements are genuinely non-negotiable. Most briefs contain three or four requirements nobody has tested against the market. This is where they surface.
Building the full population before approaching anyone. The point is knowing the size of the real universe, so that a shortlist of five can be defended as five from four hundred rather than five from whoever replied.
Senior people are not job hunting. The approach has to be worth their time, which means a partner who can answer hard questions about the business rather than a researcher reading a script.
Structured against the brief, evidence-based, and written down. What did this person actually own, at what scale, and what does the evidence say they did with it.
Presented with the reasoning, including who was considered and rejected and why. A shortlist without the rejected names is impossible to interrogate.
Where most searches lose their best candidate. Slow scheduling and shifting panels read as ambivalence to someone who is not looking for a job.
Conducted properly, against the specific concerns the assessment raised, not as a formality after the offer is drafted.
Negotiation, resignation and the first months. A signed contract is not the finish line. A meaningful share of executive failures are visible within the first hundred days.
A retainer buys the mapping. On contingency, the economics only work if a firm sends profiles quickly across many roles, which means starting from a database rather than from the market. That is a reasonable model for volume hiring and a poor one for a single appointment that will shape a function for years. See when each model fits.
It also buys the right to say no. A firm paid only on placement has an obvious incentive to find the brief achievable. A retained partner can tell you the role as written does not exist at the salary offered, which is occasionally the most useful sentence in the engagement.
We cannot make an unattractive role attractive. If the reporting line is unclear, the predecessor left in acrimony or the mandate has no real authority, strong candidates work that out in the second conversation. Search surfaces those problems early. It does not solve them, and a firm that promises otherwise is planning to sell you someone who did not notice.
We also cannot compress a market. If four people in the country have run this function at this scale and two are unmovable, the answer is a different brief, not a longer list. Between a quarter and a half of executive transitions are judged disappointing at the two year mark, and the causes are overwhelmingly contextual rather than a failure of candidate capability. The evidence on why executive hires fail sets out what that means for how a brief should be written.
Nine searches, written up with the brief, how far we searched and what was appointed. Named roles and sectors, anonymised employers.
Building the first leadership team for an Indian entry from a standing start, where the parent had no local presence to recruit against.
Leadership hiring through a growth phase, where the constraint was people who had run the function at that scale rather than availability.
Deciding which roles should exist before filling any of them, then appointing against the plan rather than against the org chart.
Read all nine mandates, including a healthcare business hiring across India and the US, a SaaS company scaling to ecosystem leader, and commercial due diligence for a French industrial group.
Each links to what we have published on hiring that role, including what the market looks like and where these searches go wrong.
Board-run process, internal and external benchmarking, succession where a founder is stepping back. How boards run a CEO search and succession planning in India.
Listed, PE-backed and growth businesses need different CFOs. Which CFO for which company and what the pay data shows.
Pay, timing and the miscasts that recur. Hiring a CHRO in India.
The role most often defined badly before the search opens. What a COO mandate has to settle first.
Composition before candidates. Board and non-executive search and independent director appointments.
Who to appoint first, and whether the role should exist yet. India market entry.
Athena has been a member firm of the Association of Executive Search and Leadership Consultants for over eight years. AESC membership is not automatic: it requires vetting against a professional practice code and is reviewed. What the badge actually certifies.
Every mandate is run by a partner from brief to close, not handed to researchers after the pitch. Offices in Gurgaon and Dubai, with partners in 45 countries for cross-border work. How we differ from a large firm, and the honest version of boutique versus large.
The honest answer is that mapping and approach are predictable while your own process is not. Research and first approaches move on a schedule we control. What sets the total is how quickly your panel can meet, how many stages you run and whether the specification changes mid-search. Searches that slip almost always slip on the client side, and the cost is usually the strongest candidate rather than the calendar.
Ask any firm for its replacement terms in writing before you sign, including what triggers it and what is excluded. More useful than the guarantee is what caused the exit. If someone leaves inside a year it is more often a mandate that turned out to be different from the one described than a misread of the individual, which is a finding worth having even though it is uncomfortable for everyone.
Usually yes, since that is where the relevant experience sits. What we will not do is approach anyone at a company you have named as off limits, and we agree that list before starting. We also do not approach people we have placed with you.
Yes, and you should insist on it from any firm. A shortlist of five means little without the four hundred it came from and the reasoning that reduced one to the other. If a firm cannot show you the population, the shortlist was assembled from a database rather than the market.
For sourcing and matching, through TheHireHub.ai. Every shortlist is still assessed and defended by a partner who has spoken to the person. AI is good at finding candidates and poor at judging whether someone can hold a room, which is frequently the actual question.
We tell you, with the evidence. Roughly speaking, a brief is wrong when the market says the combination of scope, seniority and package does not exist in the population. That conversation is easier in week three than in month five, which is the main practical argument for mapping before approaching.
Tell us about the mandate or challenge you are facing and we will show you what a tailor-made, partner-led engagement really looks like.