For the leader who thinks this only works for engineers
SuperProcure · Logistics and supply chain SaaS
A Director of Engineering, from a seven-person shortlist to a signed offer in 27 days.
- Sector
- Logistics SaaS
- Role
- Director of Engineering
- Shortlist
- 7 from 27 assessed
- To offer
- 27 days
The situation
SuperProcure builds logistics and supply-chain software, and the open seat was a Director of Engineering, a leadership hire rather than an engineer. The common wisdom is that senior searches take a quarter or more, and that a leadership hire needs a long parade of candidates before anyone feels safe deciding.
The problem
Leadership roles are where the volume-first approach fails hardest. Sending a founder or CEO twenty senior profiles to feel thorough wastes the most expensive calendars in the company, and a long, slow search signals to strong candidates that the organisation cannot decide.
What the function did
- 01
Ran the same system, tighter
The leadership search used the same definition-first approach, scaled to seniority. Twenty-seven candidates were assessed, seven reached the shortlist, and the decision-makers met only the few worth their time.
- 02
Moved at the speed that signals seriousness
Two interviews, one offer, and the hire joined. The offer went out in 27 days, against a benchmark where most senior roles take 90 or more.
The results
The average time to fill a position is approximately 44 days.Source ↗
What it was worth
- A leadership seat filled in under a month, not a quarter, so the engineering org was not left rudderless while a slow search ran.
- The decision-makers spent their time on seven qualified people, not a parade of twenty.
- The hiring rigor that closes engineering roles proved it closes leadership roles too, on the same system.
For a company like yours
If you believe a structured hiring function is fine for engineers but a leadership seat needs a long, hands-on search, this is the counterexample. The same system closes both.