ORGANISATIONAL HEALTH
Expectations as a moving target in executive selection and Vertical Role Alignment as a tool for calibration
13.10.2025
Change Is the New Normal – But Role Alignment Dialogue Remains Stalled
The rate at which the world is changing only accelerates with each generation — every 25 to 30 years brings fresh technological possibilities. Meanwhile, the planet’s population continues to grow too, further increasing the range and complexity of factors that leaders must consider before making major business and organisational decisions.
Modern organisations, especially in business, operate in landscapes that shift constantly. Fifty years ago, executives typically remained with one company, and often in the same role, for decades. Today, role tenure is counted in years—or, in some emerging markets, even in months.
In this ever-changing environment marked with high turnover of jobs and people, our experience shows that regularly identifying and updating the line manager’s expectations of a new hire is essential for successful integration and value creation, irrespective of the candidate’s experience level. While frequent recalibrations may frustrate some involved in the hiring process, we believe that this iterative approach is fundamental for long-term success.
(Gaining Clarity is Evolutionary) How the Conversation Unfolds
When managers begin to meet candidates to fill a role on their teams, they inevitably calibrate their expectations for the role based on the real individuals they encounter. Their understanding of what the market can offer is shaped not by the full breadth of talent available, but by the selected sample presented during the process — a classic case of sampling bias, where perceptions reflect the narrow view provided by this limited exposure.
As this adjustment and refinement of expectations vs. reality takes place, the hiring manager’s idea of the role itself will often shift. It is worth mentioning that some expectations may be irrational, and sometimes even legally questionable or ethically inappropriate (for instance, factors such as gender, age, or even personal dress codes). However, such matters are not the focus of this article.
In such circumstances, open and transparent communication becomes essential. Here, the search team — either an internal function or one supported by an external consultancy — must proactively articulate any evolving requirements, making sure that both the candidate and all hiring participants in the process remain duly informed. Trust is key: everyone should feel able to voice even uncomfortable or seemingly obvious questions. This clarity transforms recruitment into a genuine investment rather than a sunk cost. Still, candour alone rarely suffices.
Three Key Challenges
Organisations typically face three distinct difficulties when aligning views between hiring managers and candidates.
1. Over-reliance on job descriptions
Job descriptions are indispensable as a base—a blueprint. Yet, it is the manager’s personal view that brings real life and ‘meat’ into a role. Take, for example, the world of startups: formal job profiles are often non-existent, and trying to build them is a losing battle, given the breakneck pace at which business models, challenges, and the personal fit between leader and “ideal” candidate can evolve.
2. Lack of high-quality dialogue
More than ever, the candidate and line manager must confirm they speak the same language—their terminology and cultural reference points should be aligned, with the search team continually adding value to this process. Even if the specifics have already been discussed by others before the manager’s direct involvement, openly confirming the precise scope and nature of the role throughout the process remains crucial.
Some managers, especially those identified through assessment tools like Hogan HDS as “Imaginative,” may describe job opportunities in overly abstract and surreal ways, a tendency that reduces clarity of the expectations.
Candidates also may often disagree—sometimes consciously, sometimes not—with the authority or accountability as described by the search team. Their temperament also matters: some, when stressed, withdraw (the “Reserved” Hogan derailer), while others, overconfidently (the “Bold” derailer), hope to resolve mismatches at a later stage. In either case, difficult conversations may be avoided—storing up problems for both sides.
3. Lack of methods to size up real responsibilities
Arguably, the thorniest issue is the absence of tools to measure relevant dimensions of a role. What does “driving innovation” or “aggressive growth” actually mean? Every participant will have their own interpretation. Without clarification, misunderstanding and disappointment inevitably follow. Contrary to the common practice, KPIs such as revenue or EBITDA do not reflect ‘how’ the job is being done, which is what really matters.
It is common to see the same job titles—“Marketing Director”, “HR Business Partner”—mask hugely different actualities, depending on many factors, starting with the organisational lifecycle stage, sector (B2B or B2C), cultural traditions, etc. Our past projects in job evaluation remind us again and again: titles rarely match real zones of accountability and influence. Candidates transitioning between sectors or disciplines bring their own implicit expectations, which may not align with the reality of the new role.
Our Guidance for Search Teams
Responsibility for anticipating and solving these challenges sits firmly with the search team. Several points are vital:
By blending scientific measurement and skilled facilitation—engaging the manager, the search team, and candidate alike—we uncover hidden hopes and anxieties. This integrated approach reduces the risk and cost of poor hires, enabling the conscious and creative influence of people to shape the health and growth of organisations.
Authors:
Pavel Charny, ORTALEX, Managing Partner, Dubai
Katya Rudelson, ORTALEX, Associated Partner, Dubai
The rate at which the world is changing only accelerates with each generation — every 25 to 30 years brings fresh technological possibilities. Meanwhile, the planet’s population continues to grow too, further increasing the range and complexity of factors that leaders must consider before making major business and organisational decisions.
Modern organisations, especially in business, operate in landscapes that shift constantly. Fifty years ago, executives typically remained with one company, and often in the same role, for decades. Today, role tenure is counted in years—or, in some emerging markets, even in months.
In this ever-changing environment marked with high turnover of jobs and people, our experience shows that regularly identifying and updating the line manager’s expectations of a new hire is essential for successful integration and value creation, irrespective of the candidate’s experience level. While frequent recalibrations may frustrate some involved in the hiring process, we believe that this iterative approach is fundamental for long-term success.
(Gaining Clarity is Evolutionary) How the Conversation Unfolds
When managers begin to meet candidates to fill a role on their teams, they inevitably calibrate their expectations for the role based on the real individuals they encounter. Their understanding of what the market can offer is shaped not by the full breadth of talent available, but by the selected sample presented during the process — a classic case of sampling bias, where perceptions reflect the narrow view provided by this limited exposure.
As this adjustment and refinement of expectations vs. reality takes place, the hiring manager’s idea of the role itself will often shift. It is worth mentioning that some expectations may be irrational, and sometimes even legally questionable or ethically inappropriate (for instance, factors such as gender, age, or even personal dress codes). However, such matters are not the focus of this article.
In such circumstances, open and transparent communication becomes essential. Here, the search team — either an internal function or one supported by an external consultancy — must proactively articulate any evolving requirements, making sure that both the candidate and all hiring participants in the process remain duly informed. Trust is key: everyone should feel able to voice even uncomfortable or seemingly obvious questions. This clarity transforms recruitment into a genuine investment rather than a sunk cost. Still, candour alone rarely suffices.
Three Key Challenges
Organisations typically face three distinct difficulties when aligning views between hiring managers and candidates.
1. Over-reliance on job descriptions
Job descriptions are indispensable as a base—a blueprint. Yet, it is the manager’s personal view that brings real life and ‘meat’ into a role. Take, for example, the world of startups: formal job profiles are often non-existent, and trying to build them is a losing battle, given the breakneck pace at which business models, challenges, and the personal fit between leader and “ideal” candidate can evolve.
2. Lack of high-quality dialogue
More than ever, the candidate and line manager must confirm they speak the same language—their terminology and cultural reference points should be aligned, with the search team continually adding value to this process. Even if the specifics have already been discussed by others before the manager’s direct involvement, openly confirming the precise scope and nature of the role throughout the process remains crucial.
Some managers, especially those identified through assessment tools like Hogan HDS as “Imaginative,” may describe job opportunities in overly abstract and surreal ways, a tendency that reduces clarity of the expectations.
Candidates also may often disagree—sometimes consciously, sometimes not—with the authority or accountability as described by the search team. Their temperament also matters: some, when stressed, withdraw (the “Reserved” Hogan derailer), while others, overconfidently (the “Bold” derailer), hope to resolve mismatches at a later stage. In either case, difficult conversations may be avoided—storing up problems for both sides.
3. Lack of methods to size up real responsibilities
Arguably, the thorniest issue is the absence of tools to measure relevant dimensions of a role. What does “driving innovation” or “aggressive growth” actually mean? Every participant will have their own interpretation. Without clarification, misunderstanding and disappointment inevitably follow. Contrary to the common practice, KPIs such as revenue or EBITDA do not reflect ‘how’ the job is being done, which is what really matters.
It is common to see the same job titles—“Marketing Director”, “HR Business Partner”—mask hugely different actualities, depending on many factors, starting with the organisational lifecycle stage, sector (B2B or B2C), cultural traditions, etc. Our past projects in job evaluation remind us again and again: titles rarely match real zones of accountability and influence. Candidates transitioning between sectors or disciplines bring their own implicit expectations, which may not align with the reality of the new role.
Our Guidance for Search Teams
Responsibility for anticipating and solving these challenges sits firmly with the search team. Several points are vital:
- Treat dialogue about expectations as a living process—one that should be continually revisited. The sooner differences appear, ideally well before any offer is made, the sooner genuine trust and partnership become possible. This process should continue even after the offer is accepted, though that is a topic for another discussion.
- Never leave the process to drift or rest on assumptions. Make your position visible and take proactive steps. By practising leadership and a coaching approach, help candidates articulate their views—and if alignment is impossible, agree to part ways quickly.
- Use effective tools. Psychometric instruments like Hogan HDS can help managers and candidates surface complex aspects of expectation-setting. At ORTALEX, we also use a “Vertical Role Alignment” toolkit based on VALPEO tools to size up roles and also match expectations with a candidate’s mental processing capability, which is the most important factor in a future potential success.
By blending scientific measurement and skilled facilitation—engaging the manager, the search team, and candidate alike—we uncover hidden hopes and anxieties. This integrated approach reduces the risk and cost of poor hires, enabling the conscious and creative influence of people to shape the health and growth of organisations.
Authors:
Pavel Charny, ORTALEX, Managing Partner, Dubai
Katya Rudelson, ORTALEX, Associated Partner, Dubai