Most failed leadership appointments in technical organizations are not failures of competence. The person could do the job. They simply wanted something different from it than the organization did.
A CV documents capability: projects delivered, teams led, technologies mastered. It says little about whether the next role will draw on those capabilities in the way the candidate expects, or whether the organization's direction matches where the candidate wants to take their career.
Four alignments worth testing
At VVSM, every leadership search is framed around four questions that need positive answers at the same time:
- Capabilities and requirements. Not the list of desirable skills in the advertisement, but the specific problems this leader will have to solve in the first two years.
- Aspirations and opportunity. Whether the role offers the kind of growth, autonomy or scope the candidate is actually seeking — and not just a larger title.
- Working style and organizational reality. How decisions are made, how much structure exists, and how the leader will need to operate within it.
- Personal horizon and business horizon. Whether the candidate's medium-term plans fit the organization's strategy, including scenarios the organization would rather not discuss openly.
Testing, not assuming
Each of these can be assessed with more rigour than is usually applied. Technical depth can be explored through conversations about specific decisions and trade-offs. Motivation becomes clearer when candidates are asked what they would decline, not only what attracts them. Organizational fit improves when the hiring team describes the role's difficulties as candidly as its attractions.
The most useful question in a final interview is often the one about what would make the candidate leave within two years.
None of this replaces judgement. It gives judgement better material to work with — and it makes the conversation about the appointment more honest on both sides.