Not a political post, just an observation on my own profession: this NYT piece does a good job of illuminating an often frustratingly opaque process -- namely, who gets picked in an executive search, and most important, why.
For all the (many) times I'm asked by a board chair or CEO about Bridge Partners - Executive Search's data-based or science-led methodology for identifying candidates, when it comes down to it, the final choice between finalists invariably comes down to "rapport," "comfort-level," or "vibe." Seems my anecdotal experience found application at the Naval Observatory, too: "For Ms. Harris, it was an instinctive reaction to an instant connection rather than a data-driven exercise[.]"
Regardless of your political persuasion, there's good information in this article about the decision making process at the highest levels -- what human elements are at play versus so-called hard skills and experiences -- and most interesting for me, there are great observations on candidate anxiety and behavior, including things that might turn off a hiring authority. (Hint: Questions to the hiring team are good, they show interest and engagement. Too many questions are...not always good.)
Experienced Recruiter | Connecting Top Accounting & Office Support Talent with Leading Organizations
1moPeople will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel👍