The Balancing Act of Mum and Recruiter

mitchellake on September 6, 2016

For many women in the workforce the balance on demands between family and work are difficult. I feel that the world of recruiting brings a whole new level to the balance given the timing and demands of the position. Having only heard about how tough it was to balance motherhood and recruiting; I only recently did I experience it for myself as my first child came into the world. I wanted to share some of my personal experiences in hopes that others may learn, make decisions, or perhaps be inspired to make the right decisions for themselves about how to tackle motherhood and work.

Sleep…Sanity…Schedules…

All the things that I said “sayonara” to when my little Olivia was born five months ago. Like so many first-time mums, I knew motherhood would be hard, but not this hard. I knew motherhood would be rewarding, but not this rewarding…

The first three months of life with Olivia was a blur of non-stop feedings, diaper changes, and countless tears (from both of us). Somehow and some way, that magical third month happened. We finally found a rhythm and started understanding each other. I wanted to hold on to that time forever…but reality was fast approaching, and I was soon preparing to return back to the working world.

Life before Olivia consisted of 60-70 hour work weeks, with a three-hour commute, while life with Olivia consisted of all hours of the day committed to her. I somehow had to defy time and space…or learn how to balance mum life versus work life. I’m still learning every day, but these mini mantras have helped me strike that balance:

Bond with the mums

Other working mums get the struggle. Once you have children, it’s almost like you enter a secret sisterhood of mums, that you can share stories, and advice with. As a recruiter, I have always been sensitive to the juggling act that a working mum has to do, but I’m even more empathetic when they are a mum with a full-time job, and looking for a new job. None of my candidates ever ask for any special treatment, but sometimes I think it’s nice to hear, “oh I get it, I’m a mum.”

Bond with the non-mums

I’ve always been a pretty cool gal (at least that’s what I think). I had a pretty prolific life before baby, but life took a sharp turn when Olivia came. During maternity leave, I barely left the couch, let alone the house. I lived for what the baby needed, and my needs became a distant second. My husband was actually very excited when I returned back to work because he thought I could get a big part of my life back. It was easy for me to talk about the baby at work, and actually really hard to listen to anything else. This was definitely a step in the wrong direction since the best recruiters are the best listeners. I made a conscious decision to curb some of the baby talk, and try to listen. Being truly interested in what my candidates had to share, has improved my life in so many ways. I have built a stronger rapport with the candidates I work with, but I also get to escape and listen to their exciting lives of travel, adventure, and fun.

Be transparent with your boss

A month after being back at work, my manager asked me how I was doing. I think she was posing what she thought was a simple question, but my answer was a garbled emotional ten-minute speech. I whined about missing some first-time moments with Olivia, and then vented my frustration on trying to fill some truly tough engineering roles. I went on and on, about how some days I just didn’t even know how I was doing. As a mum herself, she reminded me how I was feeling was completely normal. She reminded me the importance of being patient and flexible as a mum, as a recruiter, but most importantly with myself. I don’t know if it was the ability to be honest with her, or the advice that she gave, but there was true comfort in telling her how I felt, without any boundaries.

Let yourself cry over spilled milk

I was storing my milk away at work when I clumsily knocked over the precious milk I had just pumped. I sat there for a full 30 seconds, contemplating on trying to scoop up the milk and save it. When I realised I was being ridiculous, and that the milk was really gone, I cried. While I was crying, I realised it wasn’t just over the spilled milk, but over a terrible phone interview that I was so excited for, it was over the terrible interview one of my hiring managers had, and it was over the candidate that decided to disappear. In that moment, I let myself be human, I didn’t have to pretend I was super mum or super recruiter. Mistakes happen, and sometimes you just have to forgive yourself.

Sometimes you get it just right

There is no magical wand to wave, but only baby steps of trial and error. Every day I wonder if I’m doing it right…and just when a cast of doubt trickles in, I look into baby Olivia’s happy and bright face, and I just know I’m balancing it…just right. Mum life versus recruiter life? Nah…just balancing a happy life.

Want more? Read our article with TeamViewer executive Barb Swanson who landed her executive role after coming back from three years of maternity leave.

What’s your experience? Continue the conversation on Twitter @MitchelLake

4.5 Mistakes Hiring Managers Should Avoid and How To Fix Them

mitchellake on August 25, 2016

Here at the MitchelLake Group we work with a lot of hi-tech startups. We love helping innovative people bring great ideas to life by matching them with other intelligent, innovative people. It’s just what we do.

In the course of working with a great many startups over the years, we have seen the full gamut of approaches to hiring from the good to the bad to the downright ugly. So much so that we could probably publish a list of the top 47 things people do wrong (or right for that matter) when hiring. But since you’re not going to read through a list of 47, I thought I’d highlight a much shorter list of the major mistakes we see startup hiring managers making time and time again. So here are the 4.5 mistakes that many hiring managers are making. Chances are you are doing or have done at least one of these.

1. You Don’t Have Job Descriptions…

You wouldn’t work on a new product feature without at least sketching out the requirements first, would you? So why do so many hiring managers expect recruiters to find them the perfect candidate without first sketching out the job requirements (i.e. writing a job description)? Kinda tough to find the perfect candidate without first knowing what that candidate looks like, don’t you think?

I’m talking here about job descriptions not job ads. A job description should be a mostly internal document which exhaustively lists every aspect of the role from day-to-day responsibilities to the overall reason for being to what the ideal candidate looks like. Often several pages long, think of this as the tech specs of the role. Not to be confused with a job ad which should be just that – an ad which highlights all the most attractive parts of the role for potential candidates.

The job description (JD) isn’t just for the recruiter either. It’s perhaps most important as a tool for the hiring manager and the interview team. When the definition of a role or the ideal candidate lives only in the hiring manager’s head, it’s impossible to evaluate candidates efficiently or accurately because, I can guarantee you, that role or ideal candidate will look a bit different in each team member’s head. Five people will have five slightly different ideas of what any role should be, no matter how simple the requirements seem. Defining the role in a job description doesn’t guarantee everyone will be on exactly the same page about every candidate later on, but it will get you a lot closer to consensus.

1.5…Or You Have Frankenstein’s JD

When pressed to write a job description, most hiring managers default to cutting and pasting (or having the recruiter cut and paste) bits and pieces from other job descriptions they find online. This Frankenstein approach is better than not having a JD at all, but only marginally so. By doing this, you’re basically saying that (insert role name here) is not important enough at your company to define properly. Even in the most derivative industries, each company is unique, each product you’re creating is unique, and the way you will go about that product development is unique. I’ll guarantee a product manager at your company is different in significant ways than a product manager at Google, Facebook, Salesforce, etc. So why copy their definitions?

Do: Take the time to really think about, and articulate, how to define each unique role at your unique company.

2. You’re Putting Too Much Emphasis on the Profile Instead of the Person

I get it. You’re busy and the thought of wasting time speaking to unqualified candidates gives you serious anxiety. So you come up with all sorts of proxies for quality. She went to Chico State? Let’s pass. Don’t like the way the resume is organised? Pass. Didn’t work at one of 10 companies you admire? Pass.

But in today’s market, the thought that you may accidentally pass on a qualified candidate without speaking to them should give you even more anxiety. I’m not saying you need to speak to every candidate – that would be silly. Of course you need some sort of screening process at the top of your funnel. Someone (hopefully an experienced recruiter) should be hunting for qualified candidates and screening out those who do not meet the bar.

The trick is to screen profiles for the possibility that the candidate is qualified. If their profile shows experience and knowledge that could possibly qualify them to do the job, then somebody should be talking to them. If that conversation does not rule them out as a candidate, they should move to the next step in the process, be that a coding test or an onsite interview or whatever is next in your process.

And yet, so many hiring managers gloss over the recruiter’s notes from the initial conversation and instead fixate on the profile or resume, discounting candidates for the university they went to 10 years ago, or the company they worked at for seven months, 3 years ago.

Do: Trust the process. Calibrate with your recruiter or whoever is running the screening process at the top of the funnel so that you’re confident in taking a call or meeting even if the profile is not the prettiest. Once you get to onsite interviews, throw the profile away and focus on the person.

3. You’re Not Conducting Group Feedback Sessions

Many hiring managers are reluctant to get their hiring team into a room to share and debate candidate feedback. They’re worried about groupthink, or they feel that it will be too difficult to get consensus and buy-in, or they are simply concerned about taking the team away from their ‘day jobs’ in order to spend yet another 30 minutes on hiring.

Instead, the hiring manager gets feedback individually from each member of the team and then filters and processes that feedback in a vacuum without the power of the group discussion where each opinion can be tested rigorously for meaning and validity. The result is that crucial hiring decisions often get made without a proper understanding of all opinions/questions/concerns, and without the buy-in that most decisions in the business achieve.

Each onsite interview should trigger a group feedback session where the hiring team gets together to share and debate their opinions on each candidate. Having an open and healthy debate on the merits of each candidate will lead to better hiring decisions that are more aligned to the job description for the role. Even in the case of a dictatorial hiring manager who does not need or desire consensus in each decision, this feedback process will ensure that they have the most robust information possible available to them in reaching that decision. And the buy-in doesn’t hurt either.

Do: Conduct a group feedback session after each onsite interview.

4. You’re Not Selling the Opportunity

Too many companies forget that interviewing is a two-way process. Interviewers take the (frankly arrogant) approach that the candidate would be lucky to get the job. They put the candidate through their paces, sending them to the whiteboard with little to no preamble and don’t take even five minutes to explain what’s so great about the role, the team, the product, the company.

Especially in a market like the one we’re in the midst of (again) in Silicon Valley, candidates are spoiled for choice. You can safely assume that every single candidate you meet will be choosing from several competing offers. When faced with so much choice, candidates gravitate to the teams and companies where they feel a connection. Will they feel a connection with your team if your time with them was limited to asking them to show they know how to write code to determine whether a string is a palindrome or not?

Candidates must be able to picture themselves working at your company or on your team. Take the time to paint that picture for them. Start out by telling them what you love about the team or the company or the product. Tell them a story about your last team outing. Tell them what you find exciting about the future and the direction the company is taking.

Do: Sell the candidate on the company and the role. Every interview, every time.

So, if you’re guilty of any of the items on this list, stop and think about how they might be impacting your hiring process. I guarantee if you avoid these four and a half mistakes, you will have a better, more efficient, more accurate hiring process.

————
If you are a high-growth technology company interested in building a world-class team or streamlining your recruitment process, please reach out to Greg and the team here.

Greg Russell is co-founder of the MitchelLake Group in the U.S and runs our MitchelLake Onsite brand.

Best In First Out: And why you shouldn’t recruit (or date) the first person you see

mitchellake on August 18, 2016

I first heard about the ‘Best In First Out’ philosophy while researching a presentation I recently conducted on sourcing. I found the concept interesting and thought it could benefit my peers, but as it was a little off topic so I decided it didn’t quite fit my presentation. I now have this platform to discuss my findings and thoughts on the concept

Best In First Out
Simply put, Best In First Out states that you shouldn’t immediately submit the first few qualified candidates you find to your hiring manager for review. The rationale is that these candidates typically won’t be the absolute best you’ll be able to find. It also doesn’t allow your hiring manager the opportunity to feel satisfied that they’re selecting the best talent from a pool of candidates that represent a good cross-section of the market.

Background
Before I go any further I first I want to give some background on the origins of the Best In First Out concept.

Essentially Best In First Out is adapted from two different methods used in the accounting industry to determine the value of unsold inventory. Those two methods are First In First Out, and Last In First Out.

First In First Out (FIFO) states that unsold inventory is comprised of the goods that were most recently acquired. The goods you acquire first are the ones that are sold the fastest and the goods you most recently put into your inventory will be the last to go. Conversely, the Last In First Out (LIFO) method implies that your unsold inventory is comprised of the goods you acquired first. The advantage FIFO has over LIFO is that goods are sold in a more methodical or systematic manner and that when older goods are finally sold, that price could be significantly different from the original cost to acquire and store that inventory.

Factors that go into considering which method to use for accounting purposes depend on several factors including the effects of inflation/deflation on the value of that unsold inventory. First In First Out is the more generally accepted method amongst accounting professionals because it is applicable in more business scenarios and provides for better accounting principles.

Best In First Out for recruitment
How this relates to recruitment was best expressed in a recent Linkedin article by Nagarjunda Reddy. His analogy about First In First Out explains that submitting the first few candidates you speak with would be like a single person walking into a bar and leaving with the first person that speaks with them. This strategy doesn’t allow for any selection to occur and doesn’t allow for the best match possible to be made. With that being said, implementing a Best In First Out approach to screening and submitting candidates is an overall better strategy that will end up producing better results in the long run.

Best In First Out means that in order to present a batch of candidates that allows for hiring manager selection, as well as representing the best that the market has to offer, you need to find and speak with 15 quality candidates and then submit the five strongest. This way your hiring manager feels satisfied in being able to select from a deep pool of high-quality candidate, representing a cross-section of the market. They can then confidently move on to the offer stage.

Putting it into practice

I had the opportunity to try out this method recently and found it to be very effective. After kicking off an engineering role with my hiring manager, I set a goal to find and speak with 15 candidates prior to submitting what I believed to be the five best. I made a point to set the expectation that my manager may not start seeing candidate resumes for a few weeks while I built up my pipeline. I let him know that I intended to only submit the top candidates from my search and that they would be vetted not only for their skill sets but their genuine interest level in joining the company as well.

From the five candidates I submitted, the hiring manager phone interviewed all five, selected three for on-site interviews. Of this, one ended up receiving and ultimately accepting the offer. The whole process from start to finish took about six weeks. I found the Best In First Out strategy to be a more efficient and a more methodical way in which to fill this particular role. I should note that I was very lucky in that I got a lot of good responses from my reach out emails to prospective candidates as well as a good amount of quality inbound candidates via our job posting. This helped me build up my pipeline quickly and within just a few weeks determine the top five worthy of submittal.

I’ve only had the chance to use this method a handful of times, but in the small sample size I’ve had to measure its effectiveness so far, I feel it’s worth trying out to see if it can benefit you as much as it has benefited me.

Have you employed the Best In First Out method? We’d love to hear your experiences. Get in touch with us on Twitter @MitchelLake

Event Review // How will FinTech impact finance brokers?

mitchellake on August 16, 2016

FinTech Event, Sydney

Last Thursday I had the pleasure of attending my first FinTech meetup since arriving in Sydney, entitled, ‘Disintermediation & diversification: How will FinTech impact finance brokers?’. Hosting the discussion was Glen Frost, joined by David Jackson, CEO of FundX, Vincent Turner, CEO of uno Home Loans, and Peter White, CEO of Finance Brokers Association of Australia.

Challenging the status quo

With such a lively title, this was a great opportunity for the incoming disruptors to lay down the gauntlet and demonstrate how they were challenging the status quo in the broker community, which for too long has been serving itself instead of the customers.

This topic is one that the entire Financial Services community should be taking notice of. Many of the emerging FinTech businesses are proactively trying to disintermediate established financial institutions by approaching one niche aspect of the financial ecosystem, such as loans, investment, property, invoice finance and remittance, and create an online, transparent and easy-to-use product. Furthermore, each of these niches are individually worth several billions in revenue annually.

The human aspect of home loan

One of the most interesting discussions was the human aspect of applying for a home loan. There are two aspects to this. The first is that currently banks require a face-to-face ID verification for home loans. As a result, this process is not online, and adds an extra layer of pain to the customer journey. This may be the point where the customer caves and decides to use a broker. The second aspect came from Peter White, CEO of the FBAA. Based on his long-standing career, (which turns out is longer than Vincent Turner, CEO of uno Home Loans, is old) he believed that people will always want to discuss significant financial transactions such as home loans, with a real person.

Currently he is correct, and even a digital native such as myself prefers talking to a person when making important financial decisions. However, Vincent at uno, a platform for individuals applying for home loans, pointed out that the typical customer profile at uno was mid 30s to 40s. This demographic represent the overlap of digital natives who also have the money to purchase property. With only 1,400 customers, I would be interested to see when individuals who have grown up with technology their entire life start buying property; whether we will see an increasing comfort in a completely online process and an evolution from using traditional brokers, to online broker platforms, such as uno.

To broker, or not to broker?

Conversely, FundX, a platform that SMBs can use to fund outstanding invoices to improve cash flow, have partnered directly with the broker community to generate new clients from both an investment and invoice perspective. Phil Foweraker, a former broker, gave the audience an insight into the world of brokers, articulating the significant opportunity for brokers to continue to act as this intermediary. This is unsurprising, SMBs are particularly difficult customers to market to, so as a result the existing broker network is essential for a growing business to acquire customers. From my experience of working with similar FinTech businesses in the UK, once the business reaches a certain size, or receives enough investment, they will naturally look to cut the cost being paid to the broker, or at least bring that cost in-house through marketing and talking to the customer directly.

Looking ahead

To conclude, the broker community is still an essential part of the growing FinTech ecosystem, they are providing FinTech businesses with leads and enabling them to grow. However, businesses like uno will ultimately aim to disintermediate the brokers, by creating an completely online process (subject to regulation and banking partnerships) aimed at savvy digital natives. Or, companies such as FundX will aim to outgrow their lead-generation via brokers to a more direct approach. Either way, the broker market is evolving, and currently they need to work closely with the FinTech ecosystem to enable its growth, whilst also considering what’s next as these businesses start to eat away at their client base.

Are you looking for your next move? View our current list of global jobs here.

Taking it one point at a time

mitchellake on August 11, 2016

“Watch the ball!”, “Concentrate!”, “What the hell are you doing out there?”, “Just give up, you’re actually useless”…. just a few of the G-rated sentences (let’s NOT discuss the R-rated ones) I yell at myself when I’m competing in a tennis tournament, heck, even if it’s just a simple practice session. For anyone who knows me well enough, they know how much of a perfectionist/basket case I am when I play. For the average spectator, it’s a humorous scene unfolding. For my poor mother who followed me around from tournament to tournament when I was kid, it was yet another bratty, stress-inducing and embarrassing outburst that resulted from one thing: trying to achieve the unachievable, perfection.

Ask yourself
In recruitment, the situation can be similar. Rewind two months ago, to the start of June 2016. In the space of two weeks, the number of projects I was working on doubled, from six to twelve. These included difficult, executive talent hires – for example, a Chief Marketing Officer hire for a Series B technology startup, and a Head of Digital for a Series A FinTech. “I can handle all of this, and it will be perfect” I said to myself, with slightly naïve optimism. By the end of June, I felt like I was slightly drowning. Completely stressed, internally screaming at myself when things didn’t go right. Occasionally thinking I was losing my ‘touch’ and doubting my capabilities. Cue to the start of August, I’ve filled the Chief Marketing Officer hire, and am at the finish line with the Head of Digital requirement. In times when things got very tough – what have I learned from this whole journey?

Attention to detail
When the amount of work starts to increase rapidly, your attention to details is the first thing that suffers. You forget to send calendar invites to candidates for interviews. Even worse, you send the candidate the wrong address for an interview. You forget to send Terms of Business to a client. You forget to ask candidates basic questions like notice periods, current visa situation and whether they have any holidays planned in the next 3-6 months. You send a candidate to an interview without giving them an accurate briefing beforehand. I did ALL of those things. I’ve learned that while it takes longer, I need to take my time more. Not paying attention and engaging in assumptive action can result in severe consequences for everyone involved.

Manage expectations
Managing expectations can result in difficult initial conversations. Whether it’s explaining to a client that they will need to pay a higher wage for the candidate they want, or the skill set they want doesn’t exist, or advising a candidate that their salary or role expectations are not realistic in the current market, I’ve learnt it comes down to the notion of it’s better to under-promise and over-deliver. Set expectations from the very start, or as close to the start as you can, to save you having uncomfortable conversations further into the process.

Embrace the pressure and belief in your self-worth
After reaching the Wimbledon semis this year aged 36, my all-time favourite tennis player, Venus Williams, said, “you have to believe in yourself. You just have to”. Recruitment is hard. The ups and downs, the rollercoaster ride, the unexpected successes, the nasty surprises. There are so many times I have questioned my ability, my knowledge within my associated verticals and if I’m still cut out for it – at work and on the court. Then I take a step back and look at my past successes and the relationships I have built. When times get tough, remember the excellent work you’ve done and back yourself to continue do great things.

You can’t do it all…
Asking for help is not a sign of weakness. Regular and open communication, whether it be with a client, candidate or colleague, reaps many benefits. This may sound like recruitment 101, but it’s so easy to bury yourself in a hole and believe that you have to figure everything out on your own. I’ve learned that the best results are achieved when effective collaboration is in place.

Check out current UX opportunities with our partners, or follow us on LinkedIn to stay across news, jobs and talent trends from startup to digital transformation around the planet.

Sydney to Silicon Valley (Gareth is on the move with MitchelLake)

mitchellake on August 4, 2016

—If you’re looking for your next great career move, let’s chat!—

Prior to joining MitchelLake, my recruitment days were effectively over. Disillusioned, bored and frustrated with an industry blighted with negative experiences and low-quality transactional relationships, I was on the market and looking for more. That’s when I was introduced to MitchelLake and told they were different. “Here we go again” I thought, expecting another ‘Digital’ recruitment business to tell me how they were different.

Needless to say, it was all true. They were different, in a very good way, and despite using a picture of Spongebob Squarepants in my presentation to the Founder and GM during interview (a story for another time), I was offered the job. My reasons for accepting the offer were many and varied, however the attraction was mostly around the WHY. Any fans of Simon Sinek and his Golden Circle  will know what I mean. It was clear during interview (and continues to be clear) that a passion for helping the Australian startup ecosystem and Corporate Innovation sectors is key to what makes MitchelLake tick. This was inspiring and energising from day one.

Starting my recruitment career within Health and Social Care in outer London (yes it was terrible!), then moving to Sydney and focusing on IT Infrastructure, the opportunity to focus on emerging tech and innovation at MitchelLake was perfect! Over the last two years, I’ve been lucky enough to have genuine impact and work strategically with clients from early stage founder teams, through high growth businesses to innovative product teams in enterprise. Along the way, being promoted to managing a small (but awesome) team in Sydney. My time here has given me unique exposure to what it means and takes to partner with tech companies both here and in Silicon Valley.

Given the challenging, rewarding, awesome time I’ve had in this role in Sydney over the past two years, it’s difficult to say goodbye…but say goodbye I must. I’m not going far though. MitchelLake’s global presence and footprint in Silicon Valley is allowing me to spread my wings and fly to the global tech capital of the world to ply my trade. I’ll be leaving behind a great team, excellent and loyal clients and a great network of technology leaders, partners and candidates. I’m confident this won’t all go to waste as we continue to grow in all regions and especially in Sydney where MitchelLake was born.

So the reigns must be handed over to the current and new Lakers as we continue to live our core values of Curiosity, Mindfulness and Partnership in all we do and in all our locations.

After more than 6 years, it’s with a heavy heart I say…goodbye Sydney, thanks for the memories!
USA and San Francisco…here I come!!

We could be your next move
Established now for 15 years, The MitchelLake Group continues to scale up our capabilities to drive global executive search, consulting and talent solutions to the world’s leading technology ventures, major corporate brands and advisory firms. MitchelLake operations now span seven cities, over four continents, and we’re looking for high performing people to join our team to continue our extraordinary growth whilst having some great fun along the way.

Perhaps you’re interested to learn more about current & future opportunities within MitchelLake. We’d love to chat. Please contact our us on 0438 209 200 or email sydney@mitchellake.com. Or follow us on LinkedIn to stay tuned.

The armchair guide to engineering leadership

mitchellake on August 1, 2016

I’m stereotyping here, but many engineers (especially young, inexperienced ones working at startups) see management as unnecessary overhead. They don’t see the value in having an engineering leader, and may or may-not respect non-technical contributions to the team. This tends to change once they work with a great leader, or have worked through a couple of poorly-managed failures.

One of the more challenging aspects about my job is judging engineering leaders without being an engineer. I’ve shared this challenge with hundreds of founders and executives who aren’t technical, but are responsible for hiring technology leaders.

You often can’t rely on the current technology team to identify, interview & attract their future boss. It is up to business leaders (often Founders) to socialize the decision to the team and make the right hire with limited technical knowledge themselves.

As such, I’ve created a framework through which to judge what kind of leader is the right for a role based on what a company needs.

No framework is perfect, and this model is only meant to set up a high level understanding of what kind of leader you’re looking for and a framework for your team to debate around.

I’d like to mention two big common mistakes before we dive into the framework itself.

Don’t conflate “Hands-on” and technical acumen

Technical acumen is separate from how hands-on someone is. There are people with terrible technical acumen who code daily, and some people with fantastic technical acumen who are pure people & process leaders. Everyone should want to hire people with excellent technical acumen, but may or may not need someone hands-on.

Hire someone who fits what you need right now, not someone with the biggest, most impressive, experience

Raffi Krikorian (ex-VPE at Twitter and currently at Uber) wrote a great article on what a VP of Engineering really does (or should do). Spoiler alert – being the best engineer on the team is not what a VPE is judged by.

Eric Larson from Riviera took this one step further and started to flesh out some different types of engineering leaders that are right for different stages of companies.

FYI – Each level has a football analogy attached to it (I like football, it’s my article!)

———-

The Framework

Active Coder – Team Captain

Profile: Usually an architect or engineering lead who still codes and commits regularly. Might have a management title but would only be a VP or CTO at a tiny company (or in a non-people leader CTO role). May or may not have management training. Often they are a strong engineer who has been recognized as a potential leader and handed people to manage or someone who is making a conscious career choice to remain (mostly) an engineer. They live for technical challenges and while they enjoy mentoring engineers, they don’t want to get too far away from their first love.

Strengths: Will pick up the ins and outs of all your code & technology on a granular level and quickly will gain the trust of the engineering team as a result. Can mentor engineers by leading by example and walking them through issues. Can help you make tactical technical decisions without slowing down delivery. Ideal for pushing out features on a single product.

Weaknesses: Active coders tend to struggle to scale people & process as they are too drawn into the day to day coding challenges & exercises. When they do lead teams, they often lead by example and don’t spend as much time building up functions like recruiting, process, architecture, and executive-level relationships with other functions.

Why hire: You have a really small and junior team that needs someone who can flat out execute, and teach the team how to do that by being an example of how they should all be as well. They can make good co-founders who can begin by coding themselves, and slowly build a team around them. Once they get beyond their ability, they will either have to hand off responsibility to someone else, or grow into the next level/role. Gives someone your team feels good rallying around as they might be the best engineer, and people see very clearly what they can learn working with them. They can be ideal for 3 – 15 person teams.

“Hobby” Coder – Positional Coach

Profile: While less of a coder than level one, the “hobby” coder still reviews code frequently and may commit from time to time. Often, they will wireframe or build prototypes that other engineers will take and put into production. They understand leadership concepts and can likely manage a manager in addition to direct reports. They are probably still ambivalent about taking themselves away from code, but are realising more of the value of leading bigger groups, releasing bigger products/features and starting to enjoy the mentorship aspect of their work. They are probably manager or director level, but might have been a VP before at a small company.

Strengths: They understand much of the day to day of what’s happening and can speak to code quality across all their teams as they are usually the ones in code reviews. They are still pretty lean and execution-focused in their mentality, but understand more about appropriate process and have some idea of what the business needs out of engineering beyond features and could likely manage engineering for a small portfolio of feature sets.

Weaknesses: Given their level of knowledge & ability, they can often micromanage teams & technical decisions and struggle to know what they should (and shouldn’t) decide themselves. They tend to hit a wall when being asked to manage other leaders for the first time and can struggle to give them adequate space & opportunity to grow (while managing risk). Unless they’ve been a founder, they are likely new or inexperienced at the executive team level and won’t be a strong contributor to the strategic vision of the business.

Why hire: You have a smallish team that needs a leader, but not someone who is out of the code (yet). They perhaps have the precursors of being a great engineering leader in their own right and can grow with the role over time. They should easily be able to win over young/small engineering teams with their hands-on ability, and are a strong enough coach to mentor them as well. They can be ideal for 15-25 person teams.

Architectural Reviewer – Defensive Coordinator

Profile: This is where many early stage VPEs fit and it’s the first level I consider a true executive. They’ve gotten to a point where they are leading at enough size & complexity that they know they can’t run the show at the code level, but they also know that their architectural insight is important to the organisation. While they may occasionally survey some code reviews, they mostly entrust that work to others and focus more on design/architecture level technical discussions. Some will still tinker with code but will struggle to find time at work and will scratch that itch at home or on the weekends with side projects. They have fully embraced the challenge of leading engineering teams at scale, but still enjoy technology challenges. Most of their direct reports will be managers, directors or architects.

Strengths: They have ideal range for early startups. They can come up to speed on technical challenges that are slowing the team down and drive delivery, but can still communicate with other executives at the business level. They know what it takes to recruit, build teams & process and establish other leaders in their organisation. They can manage delivery on a complex product roadmap and will not forget about technical debt. They know enough about the technical details and architectural direction to challenge the engineering team’s thinking.

Weaknesses: They require engineers to buy-in but won’t be able to gain their trust through coding, it’s important that they have a strategy to overcome that and the business team & founders support them. If they come into a company early they may not be as effective as a L1 or L2. It’s also important that they build a high level of trust with other executives as they are still figuring out how all the pieces fit together at the strategic level. They will likely struggle with the level of scale & polish to take a company public. They can be bullied into accepting goals that are too aggressive and under-deliver.

Why hire: You might be outgrowing a beloved founder, or bringing in your first real executive and want to pull someone in that isn’t too big a departure from the current team’s skill set & worldview. They have the gravitas to work with early-stage executive teams and still debate technical direction with their engineering team. Your company probably has found initial product-market fit but now needs to scale. Ideal for 30-60 person teams.

People & Process – Head Coach

Profile: This isn’t their first rodeo as they’ve been an engineering executive before and lead at scale. They’ve been the throat to choke for engineering and understand how to work well with the executive team while leading through their directors & managers. They might have the ability to debate technical details, but likely won’t be present at code reviews, and probably entrusts architectural decisions to others on his team. While viewing it through the lens of engineering, they are fully focused on business & product success and may not even code anymore. They see technology decisions in terms of trade-offs & resources and know that their team is only as good as the people & processes that they have assembled and invested in. They should be a capable recruiter and should have a track record of developing engineers in to executives.

Strengths:  Will be a key player at the executive level and build a motivated engineering leadership team around them. Should create an environment that ‘runs smoothly’ and doesn’t have huge resource challenges. Will do a good job of establishing targets at the executive level and making sure his team always hits the mark. Will push back on unrealistic expectations.

Weaknesses: Without scale & resources, they struggle to contribute heavily. Success comes with a price, some of these leaders won’t be as adaptable and may be too set in their established (previously successful) ways of doing things to fit every company’s culture.

Why hire: Your technology works and has survived rapid scaling after hitting product-market fit, but now it’s time to see how big & reliable it can get. Ideal for 60-100 person teams. Your business needs to start running like clockwork and avoid unpleasant surprises at the board level.

Corporate Leadership – Is the GM, hires & fires head coach(es)

Profile: This leader has achieved significant scale and is more of a technical GM than a pure engineering leader. They make high level decisions on who owns what, how to organize teams, and the most technical decision they likely make is whether to build or buy different technologies. Only the largest startups have use for leaders of this scale, and you’re most likely to find these people in Pre-IPO startups or corporate technology companies.

Strengths: Has an unparalleled understanding of how engineering integrates with every other component of the business and can speak the language of investors, product, marketing, sales & other key functions of the business. They are highly inspirational and should be expert at working themselves out of a job by developing strong leadership around them. They will shape the culture of the engineering leaders who will in turn deploy into the organization.

Weaknesses: Not right for small companies (at least in a VPE role, might be your CEO or COO for a very technical product). Might have great technical acumen in the technologies they grew up with but might struggle to stay up on new technologies and trends. Like L4s, might not be malleable enough to be successful in different company cultures.

Why hire: Preparing to go public, or already being public, you need someone who is rock-solid with investors, board members and the executive team. They can understand every aspect of the business and are a key contributor and leader at the company. Perhaps a large company with lots of resources needs someone who can ramp up a new line of business and can balance business, technology & corporate politics.

FAQs

Are the levels set in stone, or can people move between them?
The barriers between each level are somewhat arbitrary and many leaders routinely shift between them throughout their careers.

While it’s relatively easy to move one step in any direction, it is quite rare to find people who can operate across the entire spectrum and be as strong an Active Coder as they are a Corporate GM.

Many leaders tend to grow their career as people managers and have to take a step or two beyond their comfort level before they understand where they enjoy their work the most.

What should I do if/when I outgrow my engineering leader?
This happens all the time. You have to have an honest conversation around the needs of the team, the company, and as importantly, what’s right for the leader being outgrown. If you’ve hired well, the leader should understand when they aren’t strategically the right leader for the organisation. That doesn’t make it an easy conversation, but to the extent you can have an open and honest conversation about it, that’s the best starting point.

In my mind, you have 3 choices.

1 – If the leader wants to grow into the role and you want them to as well – be prepared for them to struggle, but invest in coaching & mentorship to help them make it to the next level and keep up with them on their progress and hold them accountable to the outcomes you need.

2 – If the leader doesn’t want to grow into the role and is open to being managed – start the search to help them find a new technology leader for the department. Make them a key stakeholder in the hiring process but make sure that a) they aren’t secretly wanting the role themselves and b) their individual biases (technical or otherwise) don’t distract from hiring the best person for the job.

3 – If the leader doesn’t want to grow, or can’t (or the company can’t delay) into the next level and isn’t open to being managed by a new leader. You have to either conduct a search confidentially or let them know you are hiring someone to replace them and let them make their decision. In either case, it’s best to hire someone quickly and rip off the band-aid. You may or may not be able to repair your relationship with the existing technology leader and be prepared for them to take flight (but it’s often best if you can convince them to stay in a role they can get excited about).

How do engineering leaders build trust with the team if they can’t code circles around them?
How does anyone? You have to build the team’s belief in the value of leader’s work. Help them stop wasting time building things that don’t matter to the business. Help their wins become more visible in non-technical groups. Help buffer engineering teams that need time to change from quickly changing business needs & priorities.

UPDATE July 2016: We are actively working on a number of Senior VP Engineering roles (leading 100 to 300+ engineers) in both the Asia Pacific and the San Francisco Bay area. Please connect with Jason Heck in SFO or Simon Robinson in APAC if you would like to discuss great opportunities with the most exciting growth ventures on the planet.

What are your tips when it comes to engineering leaders? We’d love to hear from you on Twitter @MitchelLake

YOU’RE INVITED: Webinar Event // The A to Z for International Pre-IPO Tech Companies Looking to Launch in Australia

mitchellake on August 1, 2016

Partnering with high growth pre-IPO tech companies exploring international expansion – including launching/scaling in APAC – is at the heart of what MitchelLake’s Kevin Griffiths, (Executive Search Partner – Growth) is passionate about. Kevin will be joining the panel for the Webinar event Doing Business in Australia: What you need to know abut investing in or setting up a technology business in Australia.

Co-hosted by Deloitte and Norton Rose Fullbright, this event will be held on August 9 (PST) and August 10 (AEST). Aiming to reach those in the USA and Europe who are considering an expansion or launch plan to Australia, Kevin will joining the likes of Dropbox’s Charlie Wood, The PR Group’s Caroline Shawyer and Nick Abrahams, author of Digital Disruption of Australia, to explore key issues to help unpack Australia’s commercial and regulatory landscape for companies looking to expand, set up or invest in Australia.

Topics to be covered include:
-Building your launch team
-How to grow the market via marketing & press coverage
-Tax & accounting
-Legal issues

Kevin’s experience in providing a launch solutions to international clients including; (which typically includes; conducting a search for a figure head, making introductions to key clients/partners and identifying a landing pad) TeamViewer, Dropbox, BlackPurl (pre-launch), SurveyMonkey, AdRoll, ClassPass, Yammer, Facebook and Signal. Kevin will provide insights including making your first key hire, building your initial team and the importance of track record and connectivity to the market. You can also expect discussions on sustaining and growing your team, winning marquee customers, and building the brand.

For more information, times and to register click here.
Registration is essential.

Event password: DTTL2016

About Kevin Griffiths: As an Executive Search Partner, Kevin is focused on supporting the success of startups, scale up and market entry for ventures in Fintech, IoT, cloud computing, big data and digital transformation.

Author

Kevin Griffiths leads MitchelLake Executive for the ANZ Practice. Based in Sydney, he is focused on supporting startups, NewCo’s, scale-ups, and established tech companies with C-suite and board requirements, in addition to working with Australian SME’s and enterprises undergoing digital/technology transformations.

Since joining MLE in 2012, Kevin has led over 100 searches. His time has been divided into three key areas – CEO searches for scale-ups or tech companies going through transformation; CTO/CPO searches for tech companies with a global requirement to bring talent to Australia with technology and/or product leadership at scale; and consulting to and leading searches with clients looking to innovate, who are seeking advice from the MLE practice on the question of build, buy, or partner.

Prior to joining MLE, Kevin was a Partner at BMS where he built and led the Midlands commercial practice in the UK, before moving to Australia to help scale the business in Sydney and Melbourne.

KevinGriffiths

kevin@mitchellake.com