CV Strategies For Executives

The Getting to Interview Playbook

Much is written about the “perfect CV”, usually by people about to sell you a template. Polish the document, insert the approved phrases and wait for a deluge of interview invitations. Senior appointments are rarely so obliging.

A CV is judged against a particular need. An ATS may test relevance. A recruiter may ask whether you look credible and worth advancing. A hiring executive may ask whether you have led at the right level and delivered results. Others may weigh reputation, internal politics or whether they could defend the appointment if it went wrong.

The job description tells you what the employer wants. ^{It tells you what the employer was prepared to publish.}

This surprises many senior executives. They may have reviewed hundreds of CVs, yet not written one for themselves in years. Judging another candidate is quite different from deciding what to leave out of your own career. Recruitment experience does not cure wishful thinking.

Consider Louise, a board member put on gardening leave after 18 years with the same biotech company. Her CV was polished and impressive in the way annual reports are impressive: substantial, respectable and rather hard to remember. She had sent it, with lightly altered cover letters, to more than fifty employers without securing an interview.

The problem was not a shortage of achievement. It was a shortage of relevance.

For one role, Louise stopped treating each application as a form to complete and began treating the appointment as a problem to solve. She studied the company’s results, leadership changes, market pressures and plans. She also spoke to people who could explain the circumstances behind the vacancy.

Her research revealed both the explicit requirements and the less visible concerns behind them.

The employer said it wanted transformation experience. The research suggested it actually needed a leader who could modernise the business without alarming investors, losing key scientists or turning a difficult transition into a public drama.

We rebuilt Louise’s application around proof that she had led regulated change, retained specialist teams, influenced a cautious board and made difficult commercial decisions without damaging the culture.

The revised application secured an interview and drew favourable comment. Louise had not shouted louder. She had made the evidence more relevant, more selective and easier for different readers to trust.

re•al•i•sa•tion

noun
The point at which an executive discovers that an impressive career and a persuasive application are not quite the same thing.

She began to note what the process had taught her:

• Treat the application as strategic marketing. A strong career speaks for itself. ^{Only if it answers their problem.} Build the case around the decision the employer must make.
• Research the real requirement. Read the advert, annual report, leadership biographies, sector news and recent results. The most important criterion may be the one nobody has written down.
• Map the decision-makers. There is one hiring manager. ^{There is usually a small jury.} Recruiters, executives, board members and advisers may each ask a different question.
• Frame accomplishments as evidence. Achievements impress on their own. ^{Relevance gives them value.} Explain the conditions, the difficulty, what you decided and what changed.
• Use your network intelligently. Networking means asking for favours. ^{Glean what the advert leaves unsaid.} Well-chosen contacts can reveal context, risks and priorities.
• Build a bespoke case. The CV, cover letter, LinkedIn profile and selection criteria response should do different jobs, but support the same reason to appoint you.

Securing a senior role takes more than sending lightly altered applications to one employer after another. Volume is not strategy. You must choose where to compete, find out what matters and select the evidence with care.

The aim is not to look perfect. It is to make the right decision easier.