When a Board or private equity fund looks for a CEO, CFO or Managing Director, it is not simply trying to find the candidate with the best CV. In reality, it is making an investment decision. And that distinction explains many things that, from a candidate's perspective, can sometimes be difficult to understand.
Experience obviously matters. In fact, recent evidence suggests it is becoming more important. During the first half of 2026, 23% of incoming CEOs at the major companies tracked by Russell Reynolds had previously been CEO of a listed company, the highest proportion in nine years. Within the S&P 500, that figure reached 34%.
It would be a mistake, however, to interpret this simply as a preference for grey hair or longer CVs. What Boards are really buying with that experience is something considerably more valuable: risk reduction.
When an executive is interviewed for a position at this level, behind many apparently conventional questions lie others that are rarely asked quite so explicitly. How will this person react when the plan stops working? Will they tell the Board something it does not want to hear? What will they do when forced to choose between protecting this quarter's numbers and making an uncomfortable decision whose benefits will not appear for another two years?
This is why, as responsibility increases, knowing what a candidate has done becomes less important than understanding how they made the decisions that explain what they have achieved.
In Private Equity, this logic is even clearer. A fund does not appoint a CEO to manage a good company indefinitely. It has acquired a business with an investment thesis and has a limited period in which to transform it and create value. The executive therefore has to be assessed against that thesis.
If the plan is to internationalise the business, make five acquisitions and double EBITDA, having successfully managed a stable company for ten years may be an excellent professional background whilst still not being the right experience for the job.
This also helps explain another trend we are seeing. Private equity firms are bringing more operational capability around their investments. A recent example in Spain is Nazca Capital's appointment of Carme Artigas as Operating Partner and chair of its new technology committee, strengthening its ability to support digital transformation and artificial intelligence across portfolio companies. The underlying message is interesting: providing capital and taking a seat on the Board is no longer enough. Investors increasingly want to participate actively in transforming their businesses.
And that has a direct impact on how executives are selected.
A fund wants to know whether a CEO understands growth, but also cash; whether they can acquire businesses, but also integrate them; whether they can professionalise an organisation without turning it into a bureaucracy; and whether they can work effectively with shareholders who will regularly ask what is being done, why, and with what results.
Context matters enormously too. The right CEO to acquire businesses may not be the right person to integrate them. Someone outstanding at leading a transformation may not be the person required for the next stage. And an executive who has performed superbly in a multinational with billions in revenue may feel surprisingly uncomfortable in a portfolio company where decisions have to be made quickly and with far fewer resources.
This is why good Executive Search processes should not begin by drafting an endless list of competencies. They should begin with a much harder conversation: what needs to happen in this company over the next three to five years for us to consider this appointment a success?
Only then should we start looking for the executive.
It is also revealing to see how major investment firms manage their own succession. CVC has just announced, roughly eighteen months in advance, who will succeed its current CEO in 2028, combining in its future leadership an executive developed internally over 19 years with another arriving from TPG. Continuity and external experience. That hardly seems accidental.
Ultimately, a Board or fund is not merely hiring experience, knowledge or leadership. It is trying to anticipate how an individual will behave in situations that have not happened yet.
A CV helps with that, but it is not enough.
Because the hardest thing to assess in a senior executive is not what they know. It is their judgement.
#ExecutiveSearch #Leadership #CEO #PrivateEquity #BoardOfDirectors #CLevel #Talent
SOURCES
AMKALIS Search & Consulting — Experience in Executive Search, executive assessment
Russell Reynolds Associates / Harvard Law School Forum — Global CEO Turnover Index, 13 August 2026
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/08/13/global-ceo-turnover-index/
Spencer Stuart / Harvard Law School Forum — 2026 Board Index Director Snapshot, 24 August 2026
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/08/24/2026-board-index-director-snapshot/
Cinco Días — Nazca Capital appoints Carme Artigas as Operating Partner, 7 September 2026
https://cincodias.elpais.com/companias/2026-09-07/nazca-capital-ficha-a-la-ex-secretaria-de-estado-carme-artigas-en-pleno-avance-en-tecnologia.html
Reuters — CVC names Todd Sisitsky and Peter Rutland co-CEOs, 8 September 2026
https://www.reuters.com/business/cvc-names-todd-sisitsky-peter-rutland-co-ceos-effective-2028-2026-09-08/
AAPL / ghSMART — Making the Leap from Corporate Leader to PE-Backed CEO, 11 August 2026
https://www.physicianleaders.org/articles/making-the-leap-from-corporate-leader-to-pe-backed-ceo
