.png)
How I use AI in executive search and where I keep it personal
As an artificial intelligence (AI) leader and business advisor, I am often asked how I use it in my own business.
It is a fair question. Clients and candidates should understand how the technology affects the service they receive, where I use it, and where my own judgement remains essential.
I discussed this with Mark Whitby on The Resilient Recruiter, in an episode about using AI without losing trust or control. We covered some of the systems behind my business, but the question that matters most to me is what those systems make possible for the people I work with.
My aim is to be better prepared, more consistent and most importantly, able to give more time to the conversations and work that matters.
The candidate experience matters
I hear horror stories from candidates about automated AI outreach. What concerns me is the gap between a message that appears personal and the experience that follows.
A message can include someone’s name, employer and career history without showing any real understanding of them. If the conversation then reveals that nobody has considered their circumstances or why the opportunity might be relevant, the apparent personal attention quickly loses credibility.
At senior level, an approach may open a conversation about leaving a significant role, relocating a family or taking responsibility for a difficult transformation. People need to know who they are dealing with and whether that person understands the implications.
For the employer instructing the advisory or search, the way a search is conducted gives candidates an early impression of the organisation they are being asked to join. Candidate experience is a critical business consideration, as a poorly considered outreach may damage confidence and trust before a client has even met them.
How technology supports my work
I use AI to help research organisations, bring together relevant information and prepare for conversations. It can help me review a company’s published priorities or organise information about leadership changes.
I also use technology to support follow-up and reduce the administrative effort involved in keeping relationships moving. Drafting assistance can give me a starting point for a communication, which I then review, edit and approve.
I was explicit about that in the podcast: the communications I described come back to me before they go out. I decide whether they are relevant, whether the language is right and whether there is a good reason to contact that person.
This matters because my business depends on a relatively small number of significant relationships. Sending more messages is only useful if those messages merit someone’s attention.
Research and preparation should improve the subsequent conversation. They should help me ask a more informed question, recognise a relevant business issue or remember something that deserves a follow-up.
They do not mean I already understand the whole situation.
Where my judgement comes in
A company’s public strategy will tell me something about its priorities. It will rarely explain the full circumstances in which a new executive will have to deliver.
The same is true of a candidate’s career history. It provides evidence to explore, but it cannot tell me everything about their judgement, motivation or the conditions in which they do their best work.
Those questions require conversation, challenge and careful interpretation.
For a client, that includes understanding what needs to change, what authority the role will carry and whether the organisation is ready to support the person it appoints. For a candidate, it includes being candid about the opportunity and the difficulties that come with it.
I remain responsible for the advice I give and the recommendations I make. Using AI does not transfer that accountability.
Being open about how I work
During the podcast, I raised a question I think deserves more attention: how do we help clients and candidates trust our use of AI?
They need a clear explanation of what it contributes, where its limitations matter and who is responsible for the outcome. They should also be able to ask questions about how we use it and what happens to their data.
Following the episode, I delivered a course on AI in recruitment to dozens of recruiters.
Many found it useful for improving their business operations while freeing up time to build relationships.
That is the outcome I care about in my own business too. Time saved has practical value when it allows better preparation, more thoughtful follow-up, or a conversation that needs more time than the diary originally allowed.
I want clients and candidates to experience the benefit of the technology through the quality of the service they receive. They should be able to understand how I work, speak to me directly and have confidence that I have considered their situation properly.
That is the standard I use to judge my use of AI.
Comments