
Here’s how executive leadership hires usually happen: A company needs a new CFO. They run a background check, verify the resume, and call three references. Everything looks good, so they make the offer.
Six months later, they’re dealing with a toxic finance team, questionable accounting decisions, and whispers about behavior that should have raised red flags during the hiring process. Yet nobody thought to ask the right questions. Nobody kept watching after the contract was signed.
Leadership risk doesn’t end when someone accepts your offer. That’s actually when it starts. You need systems that work before, during, and after hiring, as opposed to a checkbox you mark off once.
CEO turnover hit record levels in 2024, yet when you dig into why these executives failed, it’s rarely about their technical skills. They knew how to read a P&L or build a go-to-market strategy.
The problems were behavioral — how they treated people, the decisions they made under pressure, the corners they cut when nobody was looking.
Your standard background check won’t catch these components. It confirms employment dates and looks for criminal records.
Maybe you call the references on their list (who are obviously going to say nice things). You’re checking what candidates want you to check, not what you actually need to know.
Think about the ways executives really fail:
None of that shows up in a pre-hire screening.
You can’t do this without both groups pulling in the same direction. Boards have the governance authority and fiduciary responsibility.
CHROs have the organizational knowledge and the ability to actually implement systems. If either tries to go it alone, it doesn’t work.
The division of labor matters, though. The board sets the boundaries, including what level of risk is acceptable and what issues need to come to their attention immediately.
Then, the CHRO builds the actual systems, monitors compliance day-to-day, and manages the oversight process.
When boards start micromanaging or CHROs start hiding problems to avoid difficult conversations, the whole system falls apart.
The candidates you’re interviewing are giving you their best version of themselves. They’re highlighting successes and minimizing failures. Your job is to figure out what they’re not telling you. To do that:
Ultimately, cultural fit predicts success more reliably than credentials, but most companies assess this in the laziest possible way. They ask a few vague questions about leadership philosophy and then go with their gut.
A more effective approach is based on:
The information you gather during hiring isn’t just for the hiring decision. It’s the baseline for everything that comes after. What you learn about this person’s working style, their strengths and weaknesses, the situations where they’ve struggled before — all of that should inform how you onboard them and what you watch for during their first year.
Most employment contracts are basically compensation documents with some legal boilerplate. That’s a missed opportunity. Your agreement should include provisions that support ongoing risk management.
Some best practices involve:
The first 90 days are when you’ll see if there’s a cultural mismatch. Schedule regular check-ins with the new executive, their direct reports, and other stakeholders. Document what you’re hearing. If concerning patterns start showing up, address them immediately. Don’t convince yourself it’ll get better with time.
All of this gets harder to implement later, once the executive is established and has built political capital. Do it now while it’s just part of their onboarding.
People’s lives change. They take on outside board seats that create conflicts. They get involved in legal disputes. Their financial situation shifts in ways that could make them vulnerable to pressure. To address potential risks or issus post-hire:
Most companies screw this up by letting strong financial performance excuse problematic leadership behavior. The CFO hits the numbers, so nobody wants to address how they’re treating their team.
The VP of Sales delivers revenue, so everyone ignores the fact that they’re creating a toxic culture.
Your performance review process needs to explicitly separate business outcomes from behavioral and compliance factors. Use 360-degree feedback that asks specific questions about ethical leadership, team development, and cultural impact, rather than just asking, “Does this person meet objectives?”
Get input from direct reports, peers, board members, and even key customers or partners when relevant. Don’t forget to document everything.
If you eventually need to take action based on performance or behavior concerns, having a documented trail of feedback and coaching attempts is critical.
Your risk management system shouldn’t be static. Review it regularly for gaps. Learn from incidents when they happen — both your own and ones you read about at other companies. See how your processes compare to industry standards and peer organizations.
Finally, keep improving the technology. Find ways to make the system more efficient without making it less effective. Stay current on legal and regulatory changes that affect what you need to be doing.
How often the board reviews each executive should depend on the role. The CEO probably needs a quarterly review. Other C-suite members need to be updated at least twice a year. Board members themselves should be directly involved in assessing candidates for the most critical roles.
The relationship between the board and the CHRO needs clear protocols.
The CHRO needs to be able to escalate concerns to the board without worrying about retaliation from other executives. This requires some independence in the reporting relationship, at least for risk-related matters.
The board should meet with the CHRO in executive session without other executives present to discuss sensitive leadership issues. All of this needs to be documented appropriately for legal protection.
Directors can be held personally liable for oversight failures.
The business judgment rule protects you if you make informed decisions using reasonable processes, but it doesn’t protect you if you failed to establish adequate oversight systems in the first place.
You need to understand the legal expectations for director oversight in your jurisdiction and industry.
Keep contemporaneous records that show the board made informed decisions. If you’re ever questioned about your oversight, you want documentation proving you were paying attention.
Implementing this framework changes what the CHRO role actually is. You’re now a strategic risk steward with real influence at the board level.
To make this work, you need credibility. Start with C-suite roles where the stakes are highest, get the processes working there, then expand to other executive levels. This phased approach lets you demonstrate value and refine your systems before scaling.
The tools you’ll need include the following:
C-suite executives need more intensive ongoing oversight than board members because they have day-to-day operational authority.
Board members need processes focused on independence, conflicts of interest, and whether they’re actually fulfilling their fiduciary duties.
For independent directors, assess things like time commitment and attendance, how prepared they are for meetings, whether they’re actually contributing relevant expertise, their independence and objectivity, how well committees are functioning, board dynamics, and peer relationships.
Board chairs and lead directors need extra attention because of how much influence they have over board effectiveness and CEO accountability.
Don’t get complacent about internal candidates just because you think you know them already. Past performance at one level doesn’t guarantee they’ll succeed at the next level up.
When you’re promoting internally, you can use historical performance data, but recognize that managing five people is different from managing 50, and strategic thinking at the VP level is different from C-suite strategic thinking. Assess whether they’re actually ready for the increased scope and complexity. Can they lead larger teams? Handle more complex stakeholder relationships?
Watch for blind spots that come from familiarity. Just because someone’s been loyal to the organization doesn’t mean their leadership style will work at a senior level.
Global operations make this more complicated. Data privacy regulations vary, and employment laws differ by country.
What’s considered appropriate oversight in one place might be illegal somewhere else.
Multi-jurisdictional background screening is harder because different countries have different legal frameworks and different levels of data availability. And cultural norms around giving and receiving feedback vary significantly across regions.
Build flexibility into your framework to handle these variations.
If your organization doesn’t yet have a comprehensive, continuous leadership risk framework, now is the time to begin. Start with these steps:
Leadership risk management should create the conditions for executive success while protecting organizational value. Ultimately, the question is not whether you can afford to implement a continuous leadership risk framework. The question is whether you can afford not to.
Cowen Partners Executive Search is a nationally recognized executive search firm, empowering companies to find transformational leadership from the C-suite to the senior executive level. Our proven methodology identifies top-tier talent that drives growth, revenue, and long-term market impact. Learn more about our approach to executive search or contact our team to discuss your leadership needs.
Whether you’re rethinking your organizational design or aligning leadership with long-term strategy, our proven approach ensures your company is ready for what’s next.
Contact us today to discover how Cowen Partners Executive Search can help your organization define the role it truly needs and find the right leader to fill it.
From people strategy and workforce planning to enterprise operations and digital transformation, today’s CHROs face a rapidly expanding mandate.
At Cowen Partners Executive Search, we help organizations identify and develop leaders who can operate at the intersection of human capital and enterprise architecture, building leadership pipelines that anticipate tomorrow’s complexity while delivering results today.
Fill out the email request form to learn more about our approach.