The Case for Transparency in Executive Search

By Ellen Klasson, Managing Director, RCLCO

Why openness at every stage leads to better outcomes for clients and candidates alike

Executive search, much like dating, is often treated as a delicate exercise in positioning—of managing impressions, shaping narratives, and occasionally, holding information back. But when leadership decisions shape the future of a company, the stakes are too high to be anything but transparent.

This isn’t about revealing sensitive details or breaching confidentiality. It’s about being informed, candid, and direct at the moments where clarity matters most. In commercial real estate – where leadership decisions often influence deal flow, investor confidence, and firm reputation – search efforts see stronger results when transparency is treated as a core principle rather than a potential threat to closing a deal.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

Search engagements begin with a client sharing their vision for the ideal candidate and the responsibilities they would need to tackle in the role. When an inquisitive search partner is engaged, the conversation can go deeper: What does the business actually need at this stage? What are the short- and long-term objectives for the role? Is there alignment among stakeholders on what success would really look like?

Sometimes the job responsibilities don’t lead to the end goal. Sometimes the internal consensus isn’t as clear as it seems. Sometimes other companies have tried the same approach and experienced failure. A consultative partner like RCLCO can develop a search strategy that ensures the role aligns with the company’s needs – drawing on industry knowledge and best practices from leading real estate firms. Tackling these strategic issues early helps prevent costly delays later.

Effective searches are rooted in a realistic view of the candidate landscape. That means understanding what kind of talent is available, what those candidates are looking for, how the opportunity stacks up in a competitive field, and what peer firms offer in terms of scope, flexibility, and compensation. If your dream candidate doesn’t exist—or isn’t likely to leave their job for yours—shouldn’t you be made aware before making that first retainer payment to the search firm?

We recently had a client who was looking for a senior leader with parallel experience from a competitor. Following some initial research, we concluded that the competitor firms were all located in other geographic markets. Barring a possible relocation of a strong candidate, we had to have a frank discussion with our client about the trade-offs that they were willing to accept – hiring someone to work remotely, or hiring someone local who would have a learning curve understanding their exact line of business.

This isn’t bad news; it’s useful information. And it allows for smart pivots early, rather than settling late.

Top candidates (who are often gainfully employed) rarely make moves based on a job description alone. And they rarely give much thought to an opportunity without knowing who the employer is. Many are hesitant to raise their hand for something without understanding what is fueling the need for the role: the company’s position in the market, the leadership team’s dynamics, recent pivots or challenges, and organizational goals yet to be met. Without knowing the company name, much less this additional color, it becomes difficult for a candidate to do their own due diligence.

Providing candidates with honest context—based on thorough discovery from a search partner, not just talking points provided by the marketing team—leads to more meaningful conversations and stronger alignment. When candidates understand the full picture of what environment they’d be entering, engagement is more authentic and lasting.

What about confidential searches? A company may want to begin a search quietly, knowing that a current leader isn’t performing and will be exiting in the coming months. The instinct to avoid a gap in leadership is understandable. But confidential searches often create more friction than they solve. When the identity of the company, the backstory, or the context for the role can’t be shared, the quality of candidate engagement and the candidate pool itself suffers. Top talent wants to know if it is worth investing in the search process of a potential job opportunity, especially when they’re balancing the demands of their current job. That doesn’t mean transparency has to come all at once, or recklessly. But if critical information can’t be shared at the right moments, the search rarely delivers the right result. In our experience, well-timed honesty outperforms secrecy, even in sensitive situations.

Every candidate brings a unique mix of strengths and concerns. Search processes are more successful when both are surfaced early—before momentum takes over. The truth has a way of coming out eventually, and neither party wins when what’s behind the curtain differs from a company’s or candidate’s LinkedIn profile.

It’s important to engage the client in thoughtful discussions about potential risks that individuals bring to the table. And while checking references supplied by the candidate is standard, leveraging relationships to do discreet, back-channel references can offer a clearer picture. Transparency here isn’t about disqualifying people. It’s about ensuring decisions are made with full visibility.

Compensation misalignment is one of the most common reasons executive-level offers fall through, particularly in commercial real estate where a significant amount of compensation is often tied up in the success of development projects or fund vehicles. It’s far more effective to have candid conversations early in the process – with both clients and candidates – about salary demands, in-office expectations, travel requirements, and motivations to hire or be hired.

When expectations are clear from the outset, the offer stage becomes a confirmation, not a surprise. Everyone moves faster, and with greater confidence.

Conclusion

Executive search is, at its core, a decision-making process under pressure. A bad hire not only impacts the company’s ability to achieve its goals, but it can erode employee trust, damage company culture, and make it even harder to reenter the candidate market confidently.

Transparency isn’t just a virtue—it drives success. Whether with clients, candidates, or within the search process itself, clarity leads to better choices, longer tenures, and fewer surprises down the line. This kind of clarity is invaluable, as leadership teams can make or break a company.

Executive Search for Real Estate Companies