Competence Over Theatrics: How you hire determines what you build

There is an uncomfortable dynamic in professional services that does not get talked about enough. The better you are at something, the less credit you tend to receive for it.

Slow, drawn-out, visibly effortful work looks like hard work. Fast, clean, precise delivery looks like it was simple. The client who waits six months for a shortlist assumes the search was difficult. The client who receives one in ten days assumes it was straightforward.

It is a strange way to measure value, but it is how perception works. And it has a practical consequence for anyone responsible for hiring.

If you are evaluating recruitment partners, or running searches internally, be careful not to confuse activity with competence. A process that takes longer, involves more stakeholders, and generates more visible effort is not necessarily producing a better outcome. It may just be producing a more theatrical one.

We completed a C-level search recently. The client mentioned afterwards that it seemed like light work compared to a previous search they had done elsewhere that took several months. I understood what they meant, but I found myself thinking about what actually happened behind the scenes.

The brief started loose. The client was still figuring out which direction they wanted to go. That is not unusual and it is not a problem. It just means more work on our end before a single name goes to them.

• Day 1: two candidates submitted.

• Day 4: the client landed on their specific requirements.

• Day 10: six more submitted against the refined brief.

Eight candidates in ten days for a C-level position.

73 candidates approached. 8 shortlisted. 7 interviewed. 2 in the finals. 1 offered and accepted.

That does not happen because the search was easy. It happens because of ten years of building a network in this industry. Years of mapping and qualifying the entire addressable candidate pool. When a client calls us, we already know where to go and who to talk to before they have finished explaining the brief. The preparation happens long before the search begins. The search itself is just the visible part.

This matters more than most organisations realise. In a market moving at the pace this one is, the difference between hiring the right development director in two weeks and waiting four months for a shortlist is not a minor inconvenience. It can be the difference between submitting a permit on time or missing the window. Between securing a hyperscale lease and losing it to a competitor who was simply better prepared. Between a project that delivers on schedule and one that does not.

Winning a lease, improving a project's economics, or moving a stock price in the right direction does not happen because of one brilliant decision. It happens because of several competent ones made consistently over time, and many of those decisions are about people.

The measure of a search is not how long it took or how much effort was visible. It is whether the right person is now in the role and what they go on to deliver.

Choose competence. Move fast. And be sceptical of any process that mistakes complexity for rigour.

If you are working through a search that is taking longer than it should, or want to understand what a structured, specialist approach looks like in practice, we would be glad to have a conversation.