Recruiting a CEO for Kenya - Preliminaries

(This post was to appear 3 years ago!)

The election time in Kenya is fast approaching. The date is set for 4th March 2013 and the presidential race has attracted a number of candidates - I dare not try to count them all.

In my working career, I have had the privilege of being involved in recruitment exercises. I will borrow a few of the lessons I have learnt through these experiences in my analysis and decision-making as pertains to the Presidential Elections in Kenya.

Before starting the exercise, a few principles that I hold firmly when it comes to recruitment:

1. I put a lot of weight on the references especially when they come from former employers. However, I would rather get the references in an informal setting rather than the formal recommendation letter that the candidate presents. I have had to cancel a job offer to a hitherto qualified candidate on getting some informal but factual reference to his character at a former employer. The recommendation letter on the other hand is to be held with little regard. I can bet my few remaining hairs that a majority of the recommendation letters are drafted by the candidate and then signed off by their favourite managerial staff at their former employer. If however the former employer is of unbecoming character, and the candidate is endorsed by that employer, I safely invoke the "birds of a feather flock together" ideology.
2. I believe in conducting a thorough short-listing process and only subjecting 3-4 candidates for the interviews. The rest of the applicants are dropped off at the preliminary stages. If the preliminary stages cannot reduce the applicants to 3-4, then it cannot have been thorough enough.
3. I prefer having the cut-off criteria decided before the interviews begin. Anyone who does not make it to the cut-off mark after the interviews drops off from the race. It is not uncommon then that none of the short-listed candidates makes it through to an offer. I am OK with that and I have no qualms in starting the recruitment exercise all over again if none make it through.
4. Candidates who present clumsy applications or display any clumsiness in the application and interview processes are just living their true character and will most likely be even more clumsy if offered the job. Such candidates are shunned at the earliest.
5. I believe in evidence-based interviews. Do not just tell me what you can do, show me what you have done in the past in similar (not necessarily the same) circumstances and I can extrapolate and judge how you would perform in the new job should you get it.

So these are the 5 principles I hold firmly and exercise whenever I am involved in recruiting.

I would want to imagine that Kenya at the moment is my company/business and I put in my money to fund the ventures of this company. I am now in the process of recruiting a CEO for this great company to run my affairs for the next 5 years with a possible extension for further 5 years. The incumbent is set to leave and although he has done some exemplary things and brought in some growth and achievements, he has still left quite a bit to be desired. I am now looking for a leader that will take this great organization to the next level.

The advertisement for the position has been out in the public for a while now and has attracted quite a number of applicants. The ones whose applications I have acknowledged receiving are (in alphabetical order):

1. Charity Ngilu
2. Eugene Wamalwa
3. James Ole Kiyiapi
4. Kalonzo Musyoka
5. Martha Karua
6. Musalia Mudavadi
7. Mutava Musyimi
8. Peter Kenneth
9. Raila Odinga
10. Raphael Tuju
11. Uhuru Kenyatta
12. William Ruto

I know this is not the full list, but it represents those whose applications I have received and acknowledged. There might still be some who are yet to table their applications, but I have a feeling that such will be time-barred.

Next will be the short-listing exercise...coming soon.

Wairugu’s Hide and Seek – A fictional story

If you grew up in the country-side (aka ushago/shags) setting like I did, you will probably recognise and even reminisce about this game. For ease of telling the story, I will use some fictional names. Any semblance to a real person, in the public domain or otherwise is to be taken as purely coincidental. So here goes a not-so-common scenario in the game:

Wairugu is selected as the ‘it’ to start the game. The rules are simple. Muhati Nguyi will do the ‘I draw the picture of a snake on your back, which finger did I point you with?’ and Wairugu is then to guess which finger Muhati used. With every wrong guess, she accumulates 10 seconds. On this particular instance, she guesses wrongly 4 times (she clearly lacks in some acumen) and thus ends up with 40 seconds.

The next step is now to close her eyes and count up to 40 seconds, while her playmates – Kabure, Muhati, Ntuale, Mukomeni and others take the opportunity to hide. The one who is able to pull an MH370 stunt (no trace to be found), is the eventual winner in the game. After the 40 seconds are gone, much like the 40 days grace-period of a thief – I wonder who decided on 40 – the chase is now on. Wairugu is to try and find as many of her playmates as possible within the shortest time and with each find, she is to run to a designated spot and ‘Tipo’ – much like calling a press conference and tipping the press on your find!

In this particular case, Wairugu keeps searching over and over but her playmates are proving rather elusive. As an additional rule to the game, a hiding participant can observe the search party from their hiding place and if situation allows, they can run and try to get to the press (Tipo) before the one who is searching, in which case, such a person earns immunity for some specified time.

Kabure being a novice at the game, assesses that Wairugu is not seeing her and so she bolts for the ‘Press’ but Wairugu sees her and they both make a mad dash to the press getting there at virtually the same time. An argument ensues on who got to ‘Tipo’ before the other and they simply cannot agree. Kabure tries to pull Muhati into the argument, saying he witnessed her get there before Wairugu and so she should be safe. Muhati unwittingly comes out of his hiding place and Wairugu promptly ‘Tipos’ him. At this turn of events, he tries to argue that he only came out to be an arbiter between the two but Wairugu dismisses him as having lost in the game. In her books, she now has both Kabure and Muhati as having been ‘found’. Muhati distances himself, saying he did not witness what was going on between the two of them and insisting the only role he played in the game was to innocently draw on Wairugu’s back to start off the game. He goes ahead to claim that he was not even part of the hiding game and his role ended at the kick-off.

While Kabure is still arguing on whether she beat Wairugu to it or not, Wairugu starts getting frustrated. She needs to find someone else to nail and hence graduate from being the ‘it’ in the game. She therefore devices a different strategy – she can be astute sometimes. She decides that she will just shout ‘Ntuale I have seen you!’ and then proceed to ‘Tipo’ him. She does this but decides to add Mukomeni to the list. She shouts out loud for all to hear that she has found both Ntuale and Mukomeni and she runs to press ‘Tipo’. Ntuale having the quicker mouth (and slower brain) comes out breathing fire that it can’t be true. He argues that Wairugu had not found him and he should be allowed to go back into hiding. Mukomeni seeing this, also comes out, against his better judgement and joins in pointing fingers at Wairugu. The soon join forces and even start defending Kabure, although they were in hiding and did not witness what went on between Wairugu and Kabure, suddenly they are taking sides and saying Kabure statement is true and Wairugu has basically not found anyone and therefore she remains as the ‘it’ in the game. They are now even willing to serve as witnesses for Kabure in this matter…but Muhati has since distanced himself completely and already looking for a different game.

At the end of the day, what was meant to be a game for all to enjoy, has ended in bitter exchanges and finger-pointing with accusations and counter-accusations. As things stand, Wairugu is still the ‘it’. In the meantime, there are still other faceless and nameless players who are still hiding and with the way things stand, Wairugu is running out of energy and patience to find them. They are probably the winners in this game, but until Wairugu finds them and exonerates herself, she remains the ‘it’ in the game and the pressure is still on her. If the day and hence the game ends with the way things stand, Wairugu is the loser.