By Sverre Haugen
In many recruitment processes, it is not uncommon for the top leader – the CEO or «leader's leader» – to come in during the final phase of a recruitment process to meet the candidates. This is often referred to as a «grandfather interview» or «grandmother interview», and is intended to function as a final quality check before hiring. At its best, this interview can be a valuable contribution. At its worst, it risks undermining an otherwise structured and professional recruitment process.
An interview without a clear mandate
All too often, we see that top executive interviews are conducted without clearly defined Why it must be carried out, what which is to be measured, or how This needs to be done. The result? A conversation based on senior management's intuition, personal chemistry or vague gut feelings – without grounding in the competence requirements or assessments made earlier in the process.
Instead of being a targeted step in a comprehensive recruitment process, the interview becomes a potential stumbling block. The candidate is presented with a new set of questions, of varying quality and relevance. Some managers conduct a pleasant coffee chat, others treat it as a gruelling interrogation. The hiring manager and HR receive a verdict from senior management, in the worst case without insight into the criteria on which the decision is actually based.
Why are leader-to-leader interviews conducted?
The intention behind such interviews is rarely flawed: many organisations want the CEO to know candidates who will be taking on key roles. It can also be wise for the person with overall responsibility for the department or organisation to be involved in the decision. However, this assumes that the interview is used correctly – as an integrated tool in the process, not as a meaningless add-on to ensure that others have done the recruitment job well enough.
A leader-leader interview can absolutely add value. It can function as:
- A strategic assessment: Does the candidate understand the senior leadership's vision and are they motivated to contribute to the direction the company is heading?
- A final selling point: A meeting with the leader's manager shows that the recruitment is strategically anchored. This could be an important selling point for the right candidate, as after all, the candidate also has to choose the role in question.
All of this involves important considerations within a recruitment process that can naturally be part of a hiring manager's interview. Other factors, such as assessments of experience, personality and fit with the company's values, should generally be clarified long before candidates meet with the hiring manager.
Plan from the start – and measure what needs to be measured
If the leader-leader interview is to have value, it must be planned from the start of the recruitment process. This means it is included in the process design, and that one defines in advance:
- What The top leader shall assess
- How The interview is to be conducted
- When It has to happen
- What to be communicated to the candidate
In addition, the top leader must be clear about what has already been considered in the process. The leader’s interview does not provide the most value when it is a free-for-all for personal opinions, but is valuable as a step in a holistic, structured assessment. Just like other interviewers, the top leader must know what criteria the candidate is being measured against – and why.
It is important to point out that this is not about limiting the freedom of top management. It is about ensuring quality in the process, predictability, and professional treatment and assessment of candidates. When top management steps in as interviewers, and does so correctly, it enhances the organisation's credibility. When done incorrectly, the effect can be the opposite.
Sense of being a fraud as a pitfall
The most dangerous thing about an unstructured manager-to-manager interview is that it can override insights and assessments made earlier in the process. The hiring manager, HR, and other professionals may have spent hours on interviews, tests, and reference checks – and all of this can be overshadowed if the senior manager has a «gut feeling» that something is wrong.
Gut feeling has its place, but not as the primary basis for decisions. It should function as a signal that something needs further investigation – not as a veto button. If it's not clear what the gut feeling is based on, we should be cautious about letting it override an otherwise sound process. If a leader's manager has a strong gut feeling that needs to be taken into account, it might be an idea to involve them earlier in the process. Then, the rest of the process can be used to confirm or refute the manager's hypotheses.
Candidate Experience and Signals
A professionally conducted conversation with a senior executive sends a strong signal. It shows that the organisation takes recruitment seriously, and that management genuinely cares about who is hired – and why. At the same time, an unclear senior management interview can damage the candidate experience. Interviews that are unexpectedly added, unclear expectations, and new assessment criteria at the last minute can contribute to a poorer candidate experience. And few candidates like protracted processes – most candidates find three interviews acceptable, but many perceive more than three interviews as unnecessary.
Recruiters' responsibilities
The leader-leader interview is not the problem in itself. On the contrary, it can be a very useful part of a recruitment process – provided it is used correctly. The problem arises when it happens without purpose, without structure, and without respect for the insight that has already been gathered.
As recruiters, we have a responsibility to set good frameworks. We must help senior leaders ask good questions, give them the right information in advance, and ensure that the interview is integrated as part of the whole – not as a detached checkpoint. Only then will the "grandmother interview" become a valuable tool for better hires.
