1. The Brief Is Clear
“We need someone who is different from us.” As an executive search consultant, I hear this request quite often, particularly when a CEO is looking to strengthen the executive team. Perhaps the existing team consists of people who make decisions quickly, are relatively comfortable with risk and readily embrace new ideas. In that case, it seems sensible to look for someone who takes a closer look, challenges assumptions and is willing to disagree even when everyone else is already convinced.
During the initial briefing, we therefore discuss not only experience and qualifications but also the personality that would best complement the team. The instruction is explicit: we do not want another version of the executives already in place.
That principle usually holds firm until the first candidates walk into the room.
2. When the Chemistry Is Right
Let's say I present five professionally qualified candidates, including some whose personalities are quite similar to that of the CEO. This is not a contradiction of the original brief. Personality is only one dimension of suitability, and I would not want to exclude someone simply because they do not perfectly match the personality profile we initially discussed. My role is to present alternatives and offer my assessment, not to make the decision in advance.
During the interviews, I often observe a familiar pattern. With candidates who are similar to the CEO, there is an immediate connection. Each understands how the other thinks, the conversation flows naturally, and they share perspectives, perhaps even a sense of humour. Someone who thinks differently, asks more questions or places greater emphasis on risks, on the other hand, can seem more demanding. Afterwards, I frequently hear something along the lines of: “I can really see myself working with this person.”
3. The Subtle Trap of Likeability
This is entirely human, and it is far from irrelevant. Particularly within an executive team, where people work closely together and share responsibility, trust and personal rapport matter. But an enjoyable conversation tells us relatively little about whether someone brings the perspective the team is missing. After all, the original intention was to find someone different.
The reality is that people who share our convictions often reinforce them without us even noticing. Those who question our assumptions create friction. Yet that friction was precisely why we started looking for a different personality in the first place. The real challenge, therefore, is not finding someone who provides a counterbalance, but recognising the value of that difference when we meet them.
4. What If the Original Brief Was Wrong?
As a consultant, I address these contradictions. Sometimes I explicitly remind clients of the qualities we originally agreed were important and ask whether their reservations about a candidate genuinely concern suitability or simply reflect an unfamiliar way of thinking. At the same time, it would be a mistake to defend the original brief against every new insight.
Over the course of a search, which often takes several weeks, it may become clear that our initial assumptions were not entirely right. Perhaps we originally wanted someone who would provide a critical strategic counterbalance, only to realise through conversations with candidates that the direction is already firmly established and what the company really needs is someone who can execute consistently. Or perhaps an initially uncomfortable conversation reveals just how much the executive team lacks an independent perspective.
I keep both possibilities in mind when discussing candidates with my clients. I do not want to let a decision rest solely on personal chemistry, but neither do I want to discourage someone from making a well-founded choice simply because it differs from the original brief. What matters is whether there are sound reasons for the change in assessment.
5. What Has Really Changed?
Different personalities can be particularly valuable when an organisation faces far-reaching strategic decisions, while shared working styles and a similar pace can make it easier to implement a clearly defined strategy. In larger organisations, a broader range of personalities at the top can also help leadership connect with different people across the workforce.
But these considerations are only useful when applied to the specific situation. A search process should be allowed to change our thinking. It should also help us distinguish between genuine new insights and personal preferences.
Sometimes we really have come to understand that the company needs something different from what we originally thought. And sometimes we have simply met someone with whom we get along exceptionally well.
6. My Impuls
The next time you are involved in appointing a senior executive, it is worth revisiting the original brief after the first interviews. Which perspectives does your team genuinely lack? What have you learned about the requirements of the role during the selection process? And with which candidates might your personal sense of connection be influencing how you assess their suitability?
Perhaps we should look particularly carefully at the people with whom we feel an immediate connection. Because sometimes, personal chemistry can obscure what we were actually looking for.
