Demand for Interim C-Suite Leaders Jumped 151% — and Executives Keep Blowing the Interview

Demand for interim C-suite leaders has jumped 151% since 2021, according to Heidrick & Struggles' 2026 High-End Independent and Interim Talent report — yet many executives still sabotage their own candidacies before the first interview. The finding comes from an analysis of five common mistakes that, in the view of the author — who coauthored Show Up to Win: How to Land the Leadership Role You Want with Jeff Sanders, vice chair and co-managing partner at Heidrick & Struggles — routinely block leaders from securing their next role.

The backdrop has changed fast. An executive dropped from 2016 into today's job market would hardly recognize it, the analysis argues. In a decade, artificial intelligence has transformed how leaders are sourced and assessed. At the same time, demand for proven leadership runs so hot that some retired CEOs are being called back into the workforce — the return of Elliott Hill to Nike being the cited example. That combination makes how candidates position themselves during the search process critical to landing the opportunities they actually want.

What are the five mistakes?

The first is treating executive search as transactional rather than relationship-driven. The quality of a leader's network matters more than its size, the analysis stresses. The goal isn't to know the most people; it's to build meaningful relationships with people who can offer valuable perspectives.

In Show Up to Win, the author and Sanders encourage executives to be intentional about who they connect with and why. Before reaching out, they should ask themselves: What am I hoping to learn, and who is best positioned to help me learn it? The most valuable conversations come from leaders who have worked in comparable roles or navigated similar industries.

Why ignore the recruiter's call?

The second mistake is ignoring the recruiter's call because you're happy where you are. Leaders often assume they need to engage with recruiters only when they're actively looking. In reality, the analysis contends, the best networking happens before a career move is on the horizon. Without that pressure, executives can have thoughtful conversations with recruiters who offer perspective on their strengths and development areas while staying informed about trends shaping the leadership market.

Staying in touch also keeps executives top of mind when nontraditional opportunities arise. Here the 151% surge in interim C-suite demand since 2021 matters directly. Career priorities evolve as personal and professional circumstances change: an executive committed to a long-term role today may want greater flexibility tomorrow, and an interim role would let them choose assignments aligned with their interests and expertise. Leaders who engage recruiters only when they're ready to move risk missing opportunities they'd never otherwise hear about.

Should salary and brand drive the decision?

The third mistake is looking at salary and company name instead of the opportunity. When a recruiter calls, executives must resist leading with two questions: How much does it pay? And which company is it? Those details matter, the analysis concedes, but they shouldn't drive the decision.

Salary indicates what a role pays, not whether it's worth taking. Executives should instead ask about the bigger picture: Why was the role created? What business challenge is the organization trying to solve? The answers reveal more about a role's potential than the salary range or brand recognition ever will.

Has AI ruined the polished résumé?

The fourth mistake is letting AI do the work on résumés and interview answers. Résumés have always mattered, but AI has made a polished résumé a baseline. Any candidate can generate a clean, well-structured résumé in minutes, which means a strong one no longer sets leaders apart. The same shift is happening in interview preparation.

Used thoughtfully, AI can help candidates brainstorm questions and organize their thinking. The problem starts when it does too much of the work. Too often, executives share answers that sound too polished and not authentic. Hiring committees are trying to look past scripted responses and understand how leaders operate under pressure and within their operating environment.

Why does the interview go both ways?

The fifth mistake is forgetting that the interview is a two-way assessment. Leaders who treat the process as an audition they need to win, rather than a mutual evaluation, are doing it wrong, the analysis argues. As the organization assesses whether the executive fits, the executive should run the same assessment on the organization.

Before committing to an interview, leaders should research the company's culture, reputation and leadership dynamics to judge whether the role suits them. With leadership demands rising and executive burnout more common, candidates need to assess whether they're prepared for the responsibilities and pace of the position. That discipline helps leaders avoid hearing only what they want to hear, or letting excitement about the job cloud their judgment.

The more informed executives are, the better positioned they'll be to ask meaningful questions about decision-making processes, board expectations, and the organization's ability to support its leaders through periods of change.

The ultimate goal isn't simply to land the job, the analysis concludes — it's to determine whether the role truly aligns with the leader's strengths, career aspirations and leadership style. Interviews shouldn't be treated as one-off, one-way interactions; approached with rigor, they position leaders to find the right opportunity, not just the next one.

The through-line for sitting executives: the most successful ones don't wait until they need a new role to build relationships, strengthen their market position, or track how leadership expectations are evolving. They stay connected and curious, positioning themselves for what's next long before they need to.