Over the past few years, a spotlight has been shone on the topic of DE&I and its importance within organisations. The benefits of a diverse workforce for both businesses and their employees are clear. Businesses with a diverse executive board are around 36% more likely to deliver above average profitability, as reported by McKinsey. Progress towards better representation, particularly at C-suite and board level, however, remains slow. 

Many businesses admit they struggle to hire and retain diverse talent as well as achieve increased gender parity at leadership level. Although 64% of businesses in the UK have taken steps to improve the diversity of their leadership teams (as published by The Chartered Institute of Personnel Development), there is still a lot of work to be done. The 2023 UK Spencer Stuart Board Index revealed that only 16% of executive director positions in the UK were held by women, and only 13% were from a minority ethnic background. 

This has prompted conversations within the Executive Search industry about what can be done to help drive progress in this area. How, for instance, can we ensure our search and interview processes are as equitable and inclusive as possible? How can we best advise our clients on how to attract and retain diverse talent? Increasing diversity in the boardroom will require joint effort from both businesses and their Executive Search partners.  

La Fosse Executive’s Kate Robbins spoke to senior executives with recent experience of the recruitment process to learn more from their candidate perspective, understand the as-is state of play and, as a result, consider what changes need to be made. Coupled with further research, the key themes that transpired include: 

  • Interview approaches 
  • Bias and how to mitigate it 
  • Breaking into Private Equity  

Interview approaches 

Reflecting upon their recent experiences, most of our interviewed candidates recalled informal processes i.e., a series of conversational meetings without any standardised testing or assessment.  A study by Church and Rotolo found that 59% of senior leadership hires were based solely on the opinions of senior executives. Only 14% utilised psychological testing, 9% employed cognitive measures, 7% used assessment centres, and just 4% incorporated business simulations – all of which offer higher levels of validity and reliability. Whilst this study was published over a decade ago, there has been limited change; it was reported by Whysall and Bruce in 2023 that two thirds of firms rely on informal interview methods and opinions of the decision-maker when hiring C-suite professionals.  

Candidates further noted that most interview processes involved 8-10 hours of conversation with various stakeholders. It is crucial to allow sufficient time to build rapport and determine both professional and cultural fit. However, from the perspective of the female candidates we spoke to, they felt more confident about their chances of being hired when the interview process combined initial conversational meetings with structured interviews. They preferred a focus on skills and competencies, with business assessments utilised to fairly evaluate capability. Interviewees noted that business assessments were only included in around half of their interview processes.  

The recommended process is to implement a standardised approach that includes structured questions posed to all candidates, with responses evaluated consistently. Additionally, incorporating relevant business assessments or presentations enables fair comparison of each candidate’s work. Informal conversations should be used to complement this more structured approach. 

Bias 

Hiring in a less structured way may allow decisions to be more susceptible to bias and prejudice, which is often unconscious.  

Women and minorities could unintentionally and unfairly be screened out of a role due to underlying biases, for example through confirmation bias, which is a tendency to interpret information in a way that confirms pre-existing assumptions or to ignore data that contradicts assumptions. If a member of the interview panel believes that women aren’t assertive enough to be strong leaders, they might easily focus on any small sign that reinforces this view, leading to an unfair rejection. Studies by Liberman and Golom and Pelligrini support this, showing that leadership qualities are often associated with masculine characteristics and therefore can lead to prejudice against women and gay men.  

Another example is in-group bias, which refers to the tendency to favour individuals from similar groups, backgrounds, or races. This highlights how a lack of diversity on an interview panel can obstruct efforts to hire diverse candidates in the future. 

Mitigating the bias 

To minimise bias during leadership assessments, one approach is to use various testing methods such as psychometric tests, cognitive measures, assessment centres, and business simulations.  

Despite agreeing that such biases exist, all interviewed individuals felt that using tests and assessments to evaluate C-suite candidates would be neither appropriate nor relevant. Most of the women interviewed prefer question and answer interview techniques, despite recognising the potential for bias. They reasoned that, given the number of interviews conducted at this level (8+), any biases should be mitigated by the collective judgment of the interview panel. They asserted that a candidate’s track record is a more reliable indicator of future success than tests. 

Therefore, as recommended above, a fair assessment at this level is best achieved by asking the same well-considered questions of each candidate. Furthermore, a widely supported approach is comprehensive bias training for hiring managers, as many individuals may not be aware of their own biases. Such training can help mitigate these biases and foster a more equitable hiring environment. Moreover, it is crucial to ensure that board members understand the benefits of a diverse board of directors, as this awareness can drive more inclusive decision-making and enhance overall organisational effectiveness. Another way to alleviate the bias is to increase the diversity of the hiring team. Research by Egon Zehnder shows that if 40% of the hiring committee is female, there is a 40%+ chance that a woman will be hired.  

There is much more we can do to address these challenges. At La Fosse, we take proactive steps by using inclusive, neutral language in our job descriptions to ensure no one is discouraged from applying. We also broaden our recruitment efforts by engaging with diverse talent pools and track our progress using data and metrics to continuously improve. If you’re interested in learning more, we’ve created a comprehensive toolkit to guide you further, focusing specifically on gender diversity. 

Breaking into Private Equity 

Given La Fosse Executive’s expertise in Private Equity, interviewees’ experiences when joining PE-backed businesses was explored. The findings were insightful, indicating that securing an interview and entering the industry often posed a greater challenge than the interview process itself. Interviewees noted that in the PE sector, many opportunities are less visible until candidates are introduced. This underscores the importance of networking and personal connections, as success entering this field can depend on knowing the right people. For candidates from underrepresented or less privileged backgrounds, this barrier can be more significant. Without established networks or access to influential contacts, these individuals may find it particularly challenging to break into the closely connected world of private equity. 

To navigate this difficulty, we suggest implementing more ground-up initiatives that ensure diverse candidates have equal opportunities, thereby enabling them to compete on a more level playing field when they reach C-suite positions. These initiatives may include networking events or communities that incorporate programmes such as mentor-pairing, which has proven successful in providing guidance, support and networking opportunities to candidates, enhancing their preparation and advancement in the industry. Progress in this area is advancing well; approximately two thirds of the Private Equity firms represented by those interviewed have established senior women’s events, groups, or societies that focus on supporting and addressing common challenges faced by women.  

Whilst this is a positive step for gender diversity, these initiatives could be more widely provided for other groups of individuals, such as minorities and those from less privileged backgrounds, to help individuals navigate potential biases and challenges.  

Conclusion  

At La Fosse Executive, we can see that DE&I is slowly improving in terms of representation at board level and C-Suite. While tests and assessments can help reduce these biases, they aren’t always practical or relevant at this level. To make C-suite hiring fairer, we suggest that our clients focus on bias training for hiring managers and always include some structured interview elements like presentations or business plans, as well as continuing the good work on developing networking events, DE&I initiatives, and communities.  

We remain committed to advancing the careers of exceptional executives by conducting rigorous, equitable, and comprehensive interview processes that ensure our clients secure top talent while providing all candidates with a fair opportunity. 

If you’d like to share your experiences with hiring and interview processes, please feel free to get in touch with kate.robbins@lafosse.com.