Follow-Up on "Due Diligence Works Both Ways"

Follow-Up on Due Diligence Works Both Ways -

My recent article on executive due diligence (Due Diligence Works Both Ways: Questions Executives Should Ask Before Saying Yes) sparked some lively debate and two excellent questions from readers on LinkedIn that I wanted to address, extending some of the thoughts.

"How do you distinguish between a role that's genuinely transformational versus one that's simply setting up the next executive as a scapegoat?"

Excellent question - sometimes this is not easy to distinguish.

I'd look at three things: 

• Is leadership truly committed to change, or do they just want someone to blame? 

• Are they willing to provide the resources and support needed for real transformation? 

• And how do they talk about the person who was in the role before - if they blame everything on that person without taking any responsibility themselves, that's a warning sign.

"How can companies balance transparency with optimism when discussing challenges? What strategies have you seen work well in promoting a candid yet positive narrative during the recruitment process?"

This also hits on something really important. I've found the best companies handle this by being what I call "strategically honest."

The most successful approaches I've seen involve:

• Framing challenges positively as strategic priorities rather than problems "We need to transform our go-to-market approach" vs "Our sales are terrible." This shows the company recognizes what needs to be done and is actively seeking leadership to drive it.

• Sharing the "why now" story Explaining what's changed that makes this the right moment to tackle these challenges, whether it's new board support, market conditions, or recent investments.

• Showing authenticity Companies genuinely committed to change will openly discuss past mistakes and lessons learned. Red flag: when they only blame external factors without any self-reflection.

• Being specific about support structures and investments Detailing not just the resources and timeline, but what they're actually investing in alongside the hire. Are they upgrading systems, expanding teams, providing consulting support? Or hoping one person can fix everything with existing resources?

• Doing timeline reality checks Honest companies acknowledge transformation takes time and build realistic milestones. Be wary of "we need results in 90 days" for complex structural challenges - that's usually a warning sign.

• Ensuring stakeholder alignment transparency Understanding who else needs convincing of the change agenda helps executives assess the full scope of what they're taking on.

The best candidates actually appreciate this transparency - it helps them assess whether this is the right mountain to climb at this point in their career. And the real go-getters even actively seek out these challenges, often telling me "I'm not looking for an administrative routine role - I want something I can really sink my teeth into."

Companies that do this well attract executives who are energized by the challenge rather than deterred by it, so this shows more than just honesty and authenticity - it's also a real selling argument for the role, too.

This shows more than just honesty and authenticity - it's also a real selling argument for the role, too.

---

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

• Marion Heil is the founder and managing director of Board+CEO Advisors. She is based in Vienna.