2026 March- ESIX Research Roundtable
Our recent ESIX: Executive Search Information Exchange Research Roundtable focused on benchmarking KPIs, comparing tracking methods, and tackling researcher-recruiter collaboration. A central theme: most teams are measuring more than ever, but consistency remains elusive. Common metrics for director-level and above include time-to-slate, time-to-present, submittal-to-hire ratios, and candidate response rates from passive outreach. Cycle time benchmarks varied widely across the group, and members agreed that focusing on controllable metrics is more actionable than holding research functions accountable for outcomes beyond their reach. Candidate response rate is an underutilized but valuable signal — tracking outreach-to-response ratios for passive candidates gives research teams a concrete, activity-based metric that reflects both targeting quality and messaging strength.
Quality of hire sparked the richest debate. Members use a mix of 1-year retention, performance ratings, hiring manager surveys, and succession data — with some tracking promotion velocity beyond the hired role. For pure research functions that identify but don't own outreach or hiring decisions, qualitative recruiter feedback on partnership and subject matter expertise often serves as the primary quality signal — and was seen as both legitimate and meaningful. One compelling macro metric worth adopting: tracking the percentage of searches where the internal researcher identified the ultimate hire, borrowed from search firm practice.
On tooling, manual processes still dominate — Excel, Smartsheet, Airtable, Power BI, and CRM-native tracking are the norm. One standout: using Microsoft Copilot to automate real-time candidate tracking across multiple channels, which the group found practical and replicable.
The researcher-recruiter collaboration discussion revealed a wide spectrum of frameworks — from fully integrated end-to-end recruiter models with no dedicated researchers, to tiered research and recruiting teams with loose functional alignment. The consistent takeaway: viewing research and recruiting as different parts of one team with the same goal is what drives genuine collaboration.
We closed with growing interest in how AI tools and shared prompt templates could reduce manual reporting overhead and bring more consistency to how research teams demonstrate their impact.