Few decisions a newly elected governor makes will have greater consequences than the appointment of cabinet officers and agency directors. These leaders will translate campaign commitments into government action, manage complex institutions, and determine much of what an administration ultimately accomplishes.
Yet cabinet recruitment is too often approached as a conventional hiring exercise: establish qualifications, identify candidates, evaluate credentials, and select the most impressive individual.
That approach misses a larger opportunity.
An effective search is not simply about finding the best person. It is about understanding what an institution needs and finding the leader best equipped to meet those needs.
The distinction is fundamental. An accomplished executive may be poorly suited to the circumstances of a particular agency. Someone with less conventional credentials may possess precisely the judgment, experience, and leadership qualities its challenges demand.
Over more than thirty years of recruiting cabinet officers and agency directors for governors across the country, I have found that the quality of an appointment depends as much on what happens before candidates are identified as on the evaluation of the candidates themselves.
Begin With the Institution
Before recruiting a new leader, we need to understand the institution that person will inherit.
What has the agency accomplished? Where has it struggled? What internal relationships support or impede its effectiveness? What pressures come from the legislature, organized constituencies, and other agencies? What expectations does the governor have for its future?
Formal briefing materials offer part of the picture. The more revealing information often comes from confidential conversations with people who know the institution: senior managers, frontline staff, legislators, advocates, labor representatives, and other stakeholders.
These conversations are not intended to collect grievances or assign blame. They reveal patterns, competing expectations, unresolved tensions, and opportunities for change.
In one search for a state transportation secretary, we discovered that the previous secretary, selected largely for political skills, had struggled to manage the department. Senior managers operated with considerable independence, while a powerful legislative leader exercised substantial influence over agency decisions.
The problem was not simply a vacancy in the secretary's office. It was an institution with fragmented leadership and uncertain authority.
Understanding those circumstances fundamentally changed the search. The governor needed someone capable of restoring organizational coherence while navigating a difficult political relationship.
That understanding opened the door to considering several different kinds of leaders, each offering a distinct strategy for moving the agency forward.
Recruit for the Challenge, Not the Résumé
Conventional recruitment often begins with a position description and a network of familiar candidates. I prefer to begin with the circumstances the successful candidate will confront.
Rather than ask professional contacts to identify individuals who meet a prescribed list of qualifications, I describe the agency's challenges and opportunities.
Then I ask: Who do you know who could lead successfully under these circumstances?
The question changes the conversation.
A transportation search may lead to highway administrators, transit executives, infrastructure specialists, engineers, municipal leaders, or private-sector executives. Each network brings different perspectives and identifies candidates who might otherwise be overlooked.
The objective is to assemble a strong, diverse field of accomplished leaders whose experiences and approaches offer meaningful alternatives.
The most valuable candidate may be someone the administration would never have thought to seek.
Make Disagreement Part of the Search
Every major institution has competing interests, unresolved tensions, and disagreements about its direction.
A weak search avoids these issues, hoping the new executive will resolve them after taking office. A strong search makes them part of the recruitment process.
While recruiting the president of a national family planning organization, I encountered an institution divided over its future. Some leaders wanted to emphasize national policy advocacy. Others favored expanding health care services. Still others sought greater independence for local affiliates.
These were not simply differences over management style. They reflected fundamentally different visions of the organization.
Rather than conceal the disagreements, we invited candidates to explain how they would approach them.
The result was a field of qualified leaders offering distinct strategies. The governing board could evaluate not only their experience and character but also the organizational direction each represented.
Governors confront similar choices.
Does an agency need operational stability or ambitious reform? A strong manager or a policy innovator? Someone who can navigate political relationships or someone who can transform institutional culture?
The best searches make those choices explicit.
Interviews Should Be Conversations About Strategy
By the time finalists are interviewed, the administration should understand the agency's circumstances well enough to engage candidates in a substantive discussion.
I favor a straightforward interview structure.
First, ask candidates to explain their backgrounds and experiences as they relate to the opportunity.
Then ask the more consequential question:
Based on what you have learned about this agency, what do you believe you would be inheriting, and how would you approach the challenges and opportunities before it?
The ensuing discussion should be a dialogue, not a series of disconnected questions.
Candidates should be encouraged to ask their own questions about the institution and the administration's priorities. Those questions can be as revealing as their answers.
Concerns should also be raised directly. If a candidate is an accomplished policy strategist but has limited experience managing a large organization, explore that weakness. If another has impressive management credentials but limited political experience, ask how that person would navigate legislative relationships.
The objective is to understand how candidates think, exercise judgment, recognize their limitations, and approach the actual work.
Give the Governor a Choice Among Strategies
At the conclusion of a search, the governor should receive more than a ranking of finalists.
Each candidate should represent a clearly understood leadership alternative.
One might bring stability and operational discipline. Another might offer an ambitious reform agenda. A third might possess the political relationships and coalition-building skills necessary to overcome institutional resistance.
All may be qualified. Each offers a different path forward.
I recall helping a Western governor recruit the leader of a large human services system. The previous director had reduced costs but left the agency with serious morale problems.
The search produced two particularly compelling candidates. One was an experienced manager who could restore stability and organizational confidence. The other was a visionary reformer whose ambitious ideas would require greater political commitment and involve greater risk.
The governor understood the tradeoffs and chose the reformer.
Years later, I returned to the statehouse and noticed a small bronze plaque beneath the former governor's portrait. Among the accomplishments of his administration, it singled out his reform of human services.
That appointment had helped define his legacy.
The Larger Purpose of Executive Search
A well-conducted search does more than fill a position. It gives an administration a deeper understanding of the institution, its challenges, and the choices available for its future.
It also gives the successful candidate something invaluable: a clear understanding of the circumstances being inherited and the mandate for addressing them.
The strongest executive searches are therefore exercises in organizational learning and strategic decision-making as much as recruitment.
The objective is not simply to appoint an exceptional leader. It is to make an exceptional appointment—one that advances the institution's mission and creates the conditions for lasting accomplishment.
Adapted and updated from How to Recruit a Cabinet, originally prepared for the National Governors Association.