Analysis Paralysis in Hiring Marketing Leadership

Insights, tips and corrective measures to straighten out the expectations and nailing the position.

To begin with, let me share a very recent experience with you that lays the background and emphasis on the title - Analysis Paralysis in the Hiring Process.

I was recently approached by a human resource exec, who was fairly impressed by my profile and felt there is a place in her organisation that would fit me, and inturn will benefit the firm. Reluctantly, I accepted the interview round.

This was about C-suite level and when you hear c-suite role, the expectations vary from a mid-management role. Thus, I gathered my thoughts and rounded-up more than a decade-long experience into what can be made into a nice conversation.

All the excitement and hardwork came to a sudden halt when she informed me that her senior wants to have a combined call to clarify certain doubts before proceeding to hiring manager level.

Now, I already understand that the hiring process has significantly changed in last 4-5 years, and for the right reasons. Talent team is given some bunch of basic questions that mirror the actual hiring questions to gain confidence on the choice of candidate and mentally connect internal expectations to external experience. So, I was more than happy to accommodate the additional call.

Long story short, what ended up happening was the senior HR asked the same questions which the junior HR already did, and came across very indecisive & confused. Her limited exposure both in the field she was hiring for, non-clarity in thoughts and unsurety of organization's expectations from this job opening was very visible.

This was the first red flag for me. But as they say "experience eats education in breakfast". Instead of getting irritated, my team handling and vast interview experience came handy. I stayed calm and assisted her in sorting her thoughts so we can move forward in a positive direction.

Cut to 3 weeks later, finally there was an interview set, which I believed was with the VP. To my surprise, now there were 3 HRs in the meeting, asking me hiring questions. Some were exactly the same as last time. Other were the ones that should only be asked by a subject matter expert to correctly evaluate the candidature.

Agitated by the whole situation but bound by ethics, I sat through 45 min of torture and calmly gave responses. But afterwards I pondered upon what has happened.

I did not approach the firm to begin with, they approached me after going through social profile and Resume. Yet, it all went haywire. It felt like an exam checker whose actual subject is Hindi but is given a maths paper to check with an answer key. If the steps & answer matches the key then the student gets full marks, if the answer is correct but student uses a different method that doesn't match the key, they get zero. You know what I am saying!

Before I could park this situation as one-off, couple of my marketing & consulting folks reached out for podcast and end up sharing their latest interview stories. They were more frustrated than me because they were laid off in August-October 2023 and were desperately finding jobs.

Conclusion of our conversation was that this situation was not unique. They were put on hold after 1st interview and were not given any remark or feedback for months and then were told that company chose someone else. They were asked to create strategy decks and documents as part of assignment that took them upto 20-25hours. They were grilled during interviews on expanding strategy implementation for the brand itself (basically, idea aggregation).

For some, the job descriptions changed drastically from what is written on official JD to expected work. Some said they realised that the employer wants one person doing a job of 10, but was only willing to pay for 0.5 resource. Some said they were told that they were overqualified for the job but they were still rejected because they did not have IIT/IIM/IISc/Harvard/Stanford in their CVs. Some faced a situation where the position was for AD but the email subject read "interview for manager level".

Every story I heard was a mix of confused requirements and some bunch of lost people, who are either not well versed with best practices or are very far from how future is transforming from the hiring outlook.

Everything leading to "paralysis through analysis" situation for job seekers. They are all over-analysed against a hundred thousand requirements that keep changing from person to person. Basically, no set-expectations or parameters within each firm.

Now marketing itself has transformed drastically from being "just advertisement" to "digital" from "performance" to "growth marketing", which is a combination of digital+field+pre-sales+demand gen. So we can't put 100% blame on hiring managers' inadequacy. The hiring process for marketing has become the dark horse who no one is able to crack and understand. It's no longer just about candidate's skillset (Don't even get me started on the whole AI mania).

The whole human factor associated with hiring on the other side of table has become very distasteful for a candidate.

Current practices that also influence initial conversations for building right expectations across internal departments are tainted. The result is that the very basic objective behind pooling in a talented individual has been lost in noise.

Basic objective being - why are they hired at the first place? What is it that they are being hired to solve? We are looking at streamlined teams, but should 1 person really be doing a job of 10? Are the skillset we asking, aligned to the actual work this individual will be doing on everyday basis?

Yes technically, every processes is set by people & for people. But in reality, 1 person or a group of people create process from scratch as per their needs. Then that process becomes the benchmark for not just that company but other orgs as well to follow.

So, practically speaking people follow the process much more than process follow people. Eventually, if the process is faulty, if the practices are old or if the attitude towards hiring is 1-shoe fit all, then neither does it yield right results nor does it leave a positive impression.

And, this situation is not fair for either side of the table!

In this case, the process has to take a lead to help people in "hiring & talent aggregator" committee to function well.

How can we resolve the hiring problem?

There are many flaws in the system and this may not be a permanent solution. However, after talking to a few industry peers, here are few tips on which a sustainable experience can be built!

On Company Leadership Side

It starts right from top! And, there is no escape from this.

Setting process is secondary, but first and foremost is the hiring culture. Heading a company and being responsible for livelihood as well as getting the work done: The onus of being clear with "basics" fall with C-suite and board room.

I have observed through several conversations with leaders from Fortune 50 to Fortune 1000 orgs, leaders are getting affected by market drivers which is driving them to desire irrelevant skillsets and unsettling decisions. (Remember the JDs that has 20 different skillset while the work needs only 3 of those or its simply not-practical to have all the 20 skills at the same time)

Leaders need to be deliberate, up-to-date with future requirements & expectations, and practise integrity!

On Talent Aggregator Side

The HR team is always sandwiched in between hirer and hiree, so it's always tricky for them to navigate between set-in-stone, age old hiring practices and work with companies that do not have a mature process to begin with.

Both, leading to a severe lack of right components for hiring the right talent. This is why, I have huge respect and sympathy for them.

Having said that, such is the nature of their job and they know the reality, atleast after few months and years doing it. Therefore, we can't excuse the pitfalls at their end completely.

The talent aggregator team need to consciously remember three things:-

(1):: The name of department is HR - Human Resource, not CR - Company Resource. Yes, you are paid a monthly salary by the company and its your duty to facilitate requirements raised by various departments. But the salary is not paid for having head-counts only. (" With you, we now have 20 HRs in team. Year's quota completed!")

The entire hiring experience - policy, process and benefits fall under your purview, which means you have a collective, strong voice! Use it to favor the talent that must be hired through you!

No matter if you are a Jr. Executive or a Chief Hiring Officer, the value you bring to the table is the 3rd party perspective from employee side for C-suits to realise how they would create long-term associations. 
When you're new in a company, it's essential to learn the existing dynamics. However, once that is done, next step is to introduce (not challenge!) practises that can elevate the process. 

Easier said than done, but labelling it under "company wants this and it's impossible to convince leadership", is not an option!        

(2):: Clarity about the role is utmost important, so do your homework and ask questions from an employee's standpoint:-

-> What is company's aspiration with the person filling this role?

-> What is the short or long-term outcome of this position?

-> Is it a tail-end role with higher designation or a team leader role?

-> What soft skills (important for culture building) are we expecting this person to posses? I read A,B,C skills in JD... B and C don't match with other requirements. Are we sure we want to keep these in JD because it may be misleading?

And, the list goes on!

(3):: Be transparent, instead of insidious! This is in reference to renumeration band. Afterall, it is one of the two top reasons why HRs end up with a mountain of CVs in their kitties.

Here is an example. Let's assume: An employee who is looking for job change. His/her current package is say 27LPA and expectation is between 35-40LPA.

Now there san be two scenarios: either you're paying on lower side i.e. 20-25LPA or on higher side i.e. 55-80LPA, for the position. Neither of which fits this candidate, both from market practice as well as individual satisfaction POV. The possibility of that job seeker sending you their CV reduces by 75%. Imagine?!

This very relevant practice in western countries does 2 things: 

ONE - Dramatically reduces the CV qualification time as you will now have 32%-75% less CVs in your bucket; 

TWO - Creates perception of fairness and trust, ultimately leading to loyalty.        

More tips for recruiters.

On Candidate Side

I will start with the cliche! Current job market is tough.?

Remember, if you are laid off or have left organization without any offer in hand, expect a 6-10 months limbo before you get a new offer (in comparison to previous pattern, which was 1-3 months, as per current statistics).

This is the hard reality of today! Especially because of "analysis-paralysis" and "AI mania", on top of deprioritized global cash reserves, cost additions to tech infrastructure and uncertain changes to economy.

Having said that, it's time to upgrade yourself!?

3 skills that needs upgrade, whether you are in a job or are looking for one:-

(1):: Communication: This article is about Marketing Leadership Hiring, so I will speak from that lens. Do you know a CMO or a VP's lingo? Are you 100% sure that you know how to present yourself/skills/data in a meeting effectively?

Forget about being concise for a minute, are you able to express your thoughts without unnecessary thought breaks, even in the most stressed situations?

Well, if not, then take this time as an opportunity to learn-through-practise.

10 min every evening is more than enough!        

(2):: Skills: Today's time demands a leader who is a balanced combination of hard and soft skills. You need to know your jam but at the same time need to be humble, welcoming and transformational towards the people working for or with you. Are you that leader? If not, this is the time to give yourself the reality check.

Learn 1 (only 1) of the hottest skills in market that will become game changer for you in the interview. Learn 2 soft skills that you lack or are not part of your personality, but you are aware that it will be extremely helpful in your progress.

(3):: Information: Close your eyes and remember of any leader who you look upto. Think you are having a conversation with them or any interview they did in past. What do you remember the most and were impressed with?

Usually a person remembers one thing, something different that this person of influence did. But is not necessarily impressed by it. What impresses mostly people is the newness. The new information, trend or approach that person has brought into the work. Same thing is applicable to you!

An interview is about creating the impression that leads to a decisive yes. And what helps greatly is 1 or 2 points on how world in moving forward in related, and sometimes unrelated fields.

What those points are going to be? It's a judgement call that you need to make based on your profile and growth you seek. No one else can take it for you, not even your mentor.        

Remember when you speak in an interview, you speak (subconsciously) what you have done (experience), what you want to do (aspiration) and what motivates you to do what you do (culture and mindset).?

All three boxes need to be checked to get that leadership position you desire!?

P.S: Don't be influenced by leaders that are lacking in many ways but somehow are able to keep their jobs at the moment. It's natural to say, "Look at them. They are able to make the cut but not me, when I have so much to offer." Firstly, you may not know the full extent of their strengths & weaknesses. Plus, anyone who is not learning, will falter eventually. That is why, such people are never poster boys/girls for career aspirations. ;-)