Managerial Interviews

After a brief hiatus, I'm back with another newsletter. My goal is to keep these coming more frequently, and with end-of-season drama and transfer sagas on the horizon, there should be plenty to discuss.

Today's newsletter is inspired by an article I read on Sky Sports about Chelsea's search for a new Head Coach.

When a managerial employee leaves a company without a succession plan in place, the business must initiate a search for a replacement. Chelsea has put an interim Head Coach in charge until the end of the season, which makes sense as it provides stability and allows them time to find the right replacement.

However, the search process itself is what caught my attention. According to the Sky Sports article, Julian Nagelsmann, a highly regarded young coach, is no longer being considered for the role. This is because "friction between the two sides grew as Chelsea officials were determined to carry out thorough due diligence on all of the candidates before making a decision - with the German coach resenting the repeated interviews and requests for information."

Due diligence is expected in such a role, but what stands out here is the requirement for "repeated interviews." While every company conducts its hiring process differently, most candidates will accept the process with the hope that the outcome is positive. However, if these interviews are not structured and beneficial for the candidate, it becomes a repetition of the same interview with a different person. This is where so many companies fall short with the multi-interview approach, and the knock-on effect on the brand and EVP can be huge. With the advancement of Talent Acquisition technology and video calls now standard in the majority of companies, this should no longer be an excuse. TA Leaders need to review their processes and consider what is appropriate for the hiring team and the candidate. The candidate experience needs to be a priority, as interviews are as much an opportunity for the candidate to evaluate the company as it is the other way around.

The article also notes that "Nagelsmann had reservations over the role himself and sensed that Chelsea's varied shortlist reflected a lack of clarity about the direction they want to take." This is an interesting observation that highlights the two-way evaluation of the hiring process. In the past, candidate withdrawal reasons would usually be around compensation or a counteroffer from their current employer. However, candidates now have more access and awareness of companies and how they operate. They want to know what they are getting into before committing themselves and their reputation to a new role. The Chelsea search is a great example of why it's essential to have a clear strategy around the role and responsibilities before starting the search and interviews. Candidates want to see alignment and fitment before committing to a new role.

That's all for this week! As I continue to watch the drama unfold at Chelsea, I'm keen to hear your experiences with interviews and what you/your company have implemented to ensure a great candidate experience. Please share your thoughts in the comments below.