Scope & Spec Creep – The Search for the Really Stupid, Smart Executive

We are occasionally asked by clients to find really stupid, smart people. It usually starts innocently enough as with the following example…

A small, promising tech firm was growing wildly and it was clear to the CEO that a fulltime finance resource was needed. When we met to discuss the requirements, they described a generalist who could manage and guard the firm’s precious cash while also attending to administrative, reporting, HR, contractual and other responsibilities currently unattended by existing team members. The title ‘VP Finance’ was carefully selected as the role was considered very hands-on, needing someone who could roll up their sleeves and personally stickhandle the transition from shoe boxes to systems. It was agreed that it was far too ‘earthy’ a role, with too many mundane, disparate responsibilities to recruit some big-time CFO. It was noted in passing that the firm’s attention would turn to raising its next round of financing within twelve months and it was expected that the successful candidate would play a supporting a role in those efforts. The search seemed straightforward enough.

But what came next is what often comes next. As the selection committee interviewed candidates it began to expand the requirements. Perhaps it would be better, they reasoned, if the CEO devoted more of his time to the critical task of revenue generation and entrusted a greater percentage of the fund-raising activities to the VP Finance. Also, perhaps it would be useful if the VP Finance could help the CEO think through some of the broader strategic issues facing the firm, and play more of a corporate development type role. And it might be helpful if the candidate had some M&A experience since an acquisition may well be on the horizon. The CEO acknowledged that the compensation would need to be adjusted upwards given the changing specs, but pointed out that internal equity with the existing executive team would need to be respected.

As the interviews progressed, and we received feedback from the candidates, it became evident that the successful candidate, who would likely be hiring secretaries, sorting through payables and buying the office coffee in the morning, would now be expected to morph into a highly strategic, credible, outward facing corporate development super-CFO in the afternoon. The search quickly devolved into a very difficult two-headed monster.

Labour markets are generally pretty efficient and the laws of natural selection tend to work, which I guess is why they are called laws. The M&A savvy candidate is usually not the shoe-box organizer. The corporate development type usually finds administration a tad too mundane to want to do it for ten hours every day. And outstanding multitalented people tend to get paid more than their average brethren. Yet despite such truisms, spec and scope creep very gradually turns the rational search into the irrational and before you know it, firms are knee-deep in searches for really stupid, smart candidates…. they rarely end well.