They fail because the role was fuzzy, the process was slow, and the team was reading the wrong signals.
That is why we do not start with CVs.
We start by figuring out what will make this hire fail, then headhunt the right shape for the work.
No pressure. No fluff. Just a sharper read on where this hire could get expensive.
Rare engineering hire in a tight NZ market
Contract integration role filled in 4 days
ERP BA hire grew into AI Lead with $200k backing
Most teams do not have a sourcing problem first.
They have a clarity problem.
The title sounds right. The brief looks fine. The shortlist starts moving. But underneath it, the role is doing two jobs, the stakeholders want different things, and the process is rewarding the wrong signals.
That is where money starts leaking. Not after the offer. Before the search.
Simple on purpose. The goal is not to impress you with steps. The goal is to reduce the chance this hire gets expensive.
We start with a free 15-minute diagnostic to figure out whether the real risk is in the brief, the process, or the profile you are targeting. You leave with 2–3 practical fixes either way.
Once you want to move forward, we pressure-test the role properly. What does this person actually need to change? What pressure will they walk into? What would make a “good-looking” hire fail after day 30?
Once the brief is right, we headhunt directly. No volume. No noisy ad response. No wasting your team’s time on people who were never going to work.
You get a short, tight shortlist of people who have already been screened properly against the real job. Not just the title. The actual work.
We help through interviews, close, and early landing so the hire has a better chance of working in real life, not just getting signed.
Most recruiters start with sourcing.
We start with failure.
What will make this hire fail? What pressure sits around the role? What kind of person interviews well but becomes expensive after they start?
That is the difference. A lot of bad hires were not really bad hires. They were good people dropped into the wrong brief, the wrong environment, or the wrong process.
Rare skill. Tight NZ market. COVID. Relocation from Wellington to Auckland. Lead-level responsibility.
This was not a role where the business could afford to drift halfway through the search and realise the fit was wrong.
“Jess helped us solve for a rare skill set in a very tight market. This wasn’t a standard search. It needed real headhunting.”
Carl, CTO
The release was behind. The product team needed a senior systems builder who could step into a complex integration environment fast. The fit was obvious early because the market knowledge was already there.
“Jess moved quickly, understood the brief fast, and connected us to the right contractor when we needed the role to make an immediate difference.”
Peter, GM Technology
This was not the most obvious BA on paper. But she had the judgment to see the business problem properly, take it to the C-suite, and help unlock $200k in funding and the start of an AI function.
“Jess was right about her. She’s been outstanding.”
Dan, CIO
So the role is built on the real work, not a vague title.
So comp, signal, expectations, and likely friction show up before the process drifts.
So the person has a better chance of landing well.
So you are not left restarting cold.
In 15 minutes, we can usually tell whether the real problem is the brief, the process, or the profile.
No prep needed. No pressure. No hard sell.
For hiring leaders who need the hire to work in real life, not just on paper.