When a search drags on, the usual response is to widen the pipeline. More messages go out. More CVs come in. The interview calendar fills. The company feels busy, but it is often no closer to making a confident decision.
Across more than 200 placements in SEO, Paid Media and Growth, I have seen the same cause repeatedly: the hiring team never agreed on the job.
A title is not a brief
“SEO Director” can mean technical authority, department management, client leadership or commercial ownership. A job description that asks for all four usually hides the trade-off the business has not confronted.
The useful question is simple: what must be different six months after this person starts? Three to five measurable outcomes are enough. If the team cannot agree on those, sourcing candidates only brings the disagreement into interviews.
Speed comes from fewer unresolved questions
Fast searches are sometimes mistaken for rushed searches. In practice, the quickest placements often have the most disciplined setup. The salary is approved. The interview stages are fixed. Each interviewer knows what they are assessing. Feedback is written against the same scorecard.
That preparation removes the gaps where strong candidates disappear. A candidate should not wait five days while a company decides who owns the next interview.
Technical skill rarely explains the failed hire
Technical depth is easier to assess than judgement, ownership and communication. It is also easier to overvalue. Many senior marketing roles fail because the person cannot turn expertise into priorities other people can follow.
This is why our assessment gives serious weight to behaviour. How does the candidate handle incomplete information? What do they do when a stakeholder rejects the technically correct recommendation? Can they explain a hard decision without hiding behind jargon?
The best candidate may need help choosing you
High-performing specialists usually have options. A vague process tells them the company will also be vague after they join. A clear brief, direct access to the decision-maker and honest discussion of the hard parts create far more confidence than employer-brand slogans.
The quality of a hiring process is itself evidence about the quality of the company.
What I would fix first
Before adding another sourcing channel, write the scorecard. Set the salary. Remove any interview that has no distinct purpose. Give one person authority to keep the process moving.
Those changes are less visible than a new recruitment campaign. They have a much larger effect on whether the right person accepts.