Which problems has your next hire actually solved?

Investment can provide more than money.

The opening question is reasonable: why bring in an investor when the company could keep growing organically and hire more people? I describe how the value can also lie in networks, experience and a more structured way of making decisions.

Start with what the capital and partnership should provide: financing a purchase, adding particular expertise or building an organisation that can handle its next size. Then you can also judge whether hiring would have been enough.

The risk taken by someone becoming an owner is part of my reasoning too. But investing together does not automatically make every decision easy. Roles, responsibilities and what the partnership should contribute still need to be clear.

That follow-up question leads straight into recruitment: which capability does the company actually need to bring in now?

CFO is a title. The job needs describing.

A finance leadership role can look very different from one business to another. Will the person work close to purchasing and stock? Understand production? Run forecasting? Build reporting? If we only write CFO, much of the work remains undefined.

We discuss how more formality can be useful here. A major decision deserves a pause so the team can agree which weaknesses the role should address. That is different from creating more meetings about small details.

The surrounding organisation needs to be included. Who already owns which areas? Who will the person need to work with? What should she execute herself, and what should she lead with others?

That makes the requirements more realistic. It also helps candidates judge whether the assignment is right for them.

Compare the problems, as well as the company names.

A person can have done excellent work in a large organisation and face a very different daily reality in a smaller, founder-led D2C business. I want to know which resources she had there and which she will get here.

How broad was the responsibility? Did the person have a defined area with specialist teams around her, or make decisions close to purchasing, inventory and sales? Ask for examples resembling the role you are hiring for.

We also discuss experience of similar growth problems: cash flow, delayed inbound deliveries, returns and product development. The exact same category is not always decisive. What interests me is whether the person understands the friction in the journey ahead.

Meet the person who will actually do the work.

When discussing recruitment agencies, we return to a familiar vendor-selection problem: the pitches sound alike. We need to get closer to how the assignment will be delivered.

Who will find the candidates? Who runs the conversations and assessment? What experience does that person have with similar roles? Meeting only a persuasive salesperson is less useful if the work is then handed to someone we do not know.

Some value may lie in the network. There are candidates who are not waiting for a job ad, but may become interested when someone they know describes the right opportunity. That relationship takes time to build.

You still cannot outsource the entire responsibility. The company must explain the job properly, participate in interviews and understand the finalists. Paying for help with selection does not remove your responsibility for the decision.

The need determines the arrangement.

Sometimes hiring is the right next step. Elsewhere, a consultant, interim appointment or agency may fit better. We discuss ongoing full-time responsibility versus a smaller specialist need that would otherwise have to be padded with more tasks.

External help can also bring colleagues to discuss things with and experience from several businesses. An internal specialist may get closer to the product and daily organisation. Choose the arrangement to fit the assignment.

AI makes that question more relevant. Which steps can be simplified? Which responsibilities still require a person? Starting with an old job description is a mistake if the workflow around the role has already changed.

Some work still requires physical presence, relationships and execution on site. Test the technology’s possibilities against the actual task.

Do not make the start a guessing game.

When the person starts, practical conditions and clear direction need to be in place. I describe administration such as tools and access, but also how the team, goals and follow-up need to be established.

What should the person achieve in the initial period? What should she learn, and who helps her? You can be specific without pretending every role has the same ramp-up time.

A junior role developing with the team is a different assignment from an experienced leader hired to build an area independently. That distinction should be visible in expectations and support, rather than discovered as a conflict later.

Describe the initial assignment during recruitment. Have tools, access and support ready when the person begins. Otherwise you have spent a lot of money letting a new colleague wait or guess.