Recruitment scam or genuine executive search? How to spot the difference?
A senior executive recently shared with me how he was drawn into what appeared to be a confidential C-suite recruitment process.
By the time he realized something was wrong, he had lost USD 500, spent many hours on the process, and found himself caught in a scheme that displayed several warning signs from the very beginning.
I reviewed, with permission, the series of communications involving him and three different people. It contained so many warning signs that it prompted me to write this article to warn you.
Like this true story, the stories of being scammed by fake recruiters are often remarkably similar.
- A recruiter contacts you unexpectedly.
- The role sounds super impressive.
- The compensation package is very attractive.
- The hiring company is described as a global market leader.
There is often mention of a confidential search, an urgent requirement, or a shortlist that is about to close.
For executives who have spent decades building their careers, these approaches can be flattering and exciting. Sometimes they lead to genuine opportunities. Sometimes they do not.
Recently, I reviewed a series of communications involving a senior executive candidate, several recruiters, and a professional resume writer. While I cannot state with certainty that the operation was fraudulent, the communication contained so many warning signs that it prompted me to write this article to warn you.
The purpose is not to accuse anyone of wrongdoing. Rather, it is to help executives understand what they should look for when approached about senior leadership positions.
First warning sign: Lack of professional corporate identity
The individuals involved claimed to represent executive recruitment and talent acquisition functions. They presented themselves as senior recruiters working on C suite and regional leadership searches. Yet all communications were conducted through free Gmail accounts rather than corporate email addresses.
When someone claims to represent a major international recruitment firm or a multinational corporation, it is entirely reasonable to expect communication through a professional company domain.
Second concern: The constant sense of urgency
Throughout the correspondence, the candidate was repeatedly told that documents had to be updated immediately. Deadlines were described as critical.
The application process was supposedly moving forward rapidly. There was repeated pressure to act within hours or a few days.
This is a tactic often seen in questionable schemes. Urgency discourages people from asking questions. It encourages them to act first and think later.
As a headhunter myself, in executive recruitment of top executives, for over 20 years I can tell you that recruitment at senior levels typically involves detailed discussions, stakeholder interviews, and a thorough evaluation process. It rarely depends on whether a candidate can update a resume within 24 or 48 hours.
Third warning sign: Complete absence of direct conversation
The candidate repeatedly requested telephone calls, LinkedIn connections, and opportunities to speak directly.
Those requests were consistently avoided. Various explanations were offered, including workload, technical issues, scheduling conflicts, and other reasons why a call could not happen.
Executive recruiters spend much of their time speaking with people. Building relationships and evaluating leadership talent requires conversation.
As someone who has spent more than twenty years in executive search, I find this difficult to reconcile with normal recruitment practice. Who would not want to have a conversation, telephone or video?
It is difficult to imagine a recruiter managing a search for a CEO, Regional President, or Managing Director role while repeatedly avoiding direct contact with a highly relevant candidate.
The most significant warning sign emerged when the focus shifted from the opportunity itself to the candidate’s resume.
Fourth warning: Resume rewrite a must suddenly!
Initially, the candidate was approached regarding a highly attractive executive position. Shortly afterwards, the recruiter explained that the candidate’s resume did not meet executive standards and required professional enhancement.
A specialist was recommended. Fees were discussed. Additional services were proposed. A cover letter became necessary. Further spending was encouraged.
At that point, the recruitment opportunity appeared to become secondary to the sale of career services.
This follows a pattern that has become increasingly common.
An attractive role is used to establish credibility and interest. Once engagement has been created, attention turns toward selling resume writing, executive branding, LinkedIn optimization, coaching services, or other products.
There is nothing wrong per se with professional resume writing services. You know that I provide this service to candidates to help overhaul LinkedIn and resume/CV profiles.
Many executives use them successfully. The concern arises when the service appears to be the real objective while the recruitment opportunity becomes little more than a sales mechanism.
Warning signs continued: Nature of position being advertised
The opportunities sounded almost too good to be true. Regional President APAC. Chief Executive Officer. Managing Director. Vice President of Corporate Development. Senior Vice President of Commercial Excellence. Compensation packages approaching or exceeding half a million dollars annually.
In this actual case, the salary was 700,000 USD annually. Sure, enough to get anyone listening.
The descriptions were broad, generic, and designed to appeal to ambitious senior executives across multiple industries.
In contrast, genuine executive search assignments are usually highly specific. A retained recruiter can normally explain the business challenge, reporting line, organisational structure, geographic scope, and reason for the search. The conversation is focused and detailed rather than generic and promotional.
What should executives do when approached about opportunities?
The answer is simple. Slow down and verify.
- Ask for a call.
- Ask for a video meeting.
- Request the recruiter’s LinkedIn profile.
- Check the company’s website.
- Look at their digital footprint.
Verify that they work for the organisation they claim to represent. Search for independent evidence that the recruiter and the assignment are genuine.
Most importantly, be cautious whenever money begins flowing from candidate to recruiter.
The traditional recruitment model is straightforward. Employers pay recruiters to identify talent. Candidates should not feel pressured to spend significant amounts of money in order to access opportunities.
Whenever a recruiter becomes more interested in selling services than discussing the actual role, it is time to step back and ask difficult questions.
The reality is that there are many excellent recruiters in the market who conduct themselves professionally and ethically.
There are also individuals who understand how to create the appearance of opportunity without ever delivering one.
As senior executives, we are trained to perform due diligence before making important business decisions.
You must apply the same principle when evaluating career opportunities.
If something feels wrong, investigate further.
A genuine executive opportunity will withstand scrutiny.
A questionable one often falls apart the moment you start asking questions.
