Days before joining as the chief operating officer (COO) of a leading automotive company, a seasoned executive backed out. In his early 50s, the executive had built a reputation for steady leadership with sharp execution capabilities, and being an able team leader.
“It seems he chose another opportunity—one with better pay, a more flexible setup, and perks that were hard to refuse,” said a senior official at a recruitment firm involved in the search for the new COO.
This is yet another instance of C-suite professionals turning increasingly cautious—some say choosy—about their next move. Many are opting to withdraw at the last moment, leaving their potential new employers scrambling.
Senior leaders are now spending more time weighing risks and responsibilities of new roles amid a volatile business environment. Resilient demand for seasoned C-suite professionals is also working in their favour despite an overall soft job market.
“For a CEO or CXO in their mid-40s, the next ten years are critical—reset years. They think ten times before accepting a leadership role because one wrong move, one failure, and no one will touch you again,” said D Shivakumar, former CEO at PepsiCo, and currently operating partner at Advent India.
Executive tenures, especially for CEOs, have also grown shorter. Few stay beyond five years. Many now look for faster exits, quicker returns, and cleaner handovers, where agility, caution, and timing rule the boardroom, noted Shivakumar.
“Candidates reneging at the last moment are becoming more and more conspicuous,” said Jyoti Bowen Nath, managing partner at executive search firm Claricent Partners.
Experts said this is also due to enduring demand for seasoned C-suite professionals and a supply shortage.
“Leadership hiring across most sectors continues to be buoyant despite the ambiguous geopolitical environment. Perhaps a hint of caution, but definitely the C-suite is seeing ample movement,” said Nath. “Due to candidates being spoilt for choice, we are seeing last minute back-outs, and in many cases, the counteroffers are coming from the current employer in a bid to retain their stars.”
Nath noted that “the unfortunate part is that the decision of dropping out is communicated too late in the day to the search partner or the potential partner, and in some cases, on the day of joining.” “This can be very unsettling as companies lose out on lead time since most candidates anyway have a three months’ notice,” she said.
“More often than not a CXO declines an opportunity due to personal reasons. A new industry, locational change, and a high attrition rate are reasons which make them look elsewhere,” according to the HR head at a Delhi-based conglomerate, who asked not to be named.
These decisions—controversial as it may seem—reflect the evolving reality, and only self-preservation may be the strategic move of all, said a board member of a company.
On their part, search firms—to minimise last-stage risks—are advising clients to keep a strong ‘second’ candidate ready and waiting even after an offer is successfully made.
“But more often than not corporates don’t invest time in doing this, and when the selected candidate backs out at the last minute, it’s back to reinventing the wheel,” said Nath. “Often in such cases, due to the lead time lost, companies move internal candidates even though they are not ready for the role, only in the interest of time, and often such experiments fail.”
Recently, the candidate for a chief human resources officer (CHRO) role rejected a lucrative opportunity just days before joining as his present employer retained him with a competitive offer. The reason cited was that the executive’s family was not endorsing the relocation.
Nath also noted a few cases of candidates withdrawing due to political ambiguity, and uncertainty over the impact of the Trump administration's policies, leaving candidates worried about venturing out of their comfort zones.
“It seems he chose another opportunity—one with better pay, a more flexible setup, and perks that were hard to refuse,” said a senior official at a recruitment firm involved in the search for the new COO.
This is yet another instance of C-suite professionals turning increasingly cautious—some say choosy—about their next move. Many are opting to withdraw at the last moment, leaving their potential new employers scrambling.
Senior leaders are now spending more time weighing risks and responsibilities of new roles amid a volatile business environment. Resilient demand for seasoned C-suite professionals is also working in their favour despite an overall soft job market.
“For a CEO or CXO in their mid-40s, the next ten years are critical—reset years. They think ten times before accepting a leadership role because one wrong move, one failure, and no one will touch you again,” said D Shivakumar, former CEO at PepsiCo, and currently operating partner at Advent India.
Executive tenures, especially for CEOs, have also grown shorter. Few stay beyond five years. Many now look for faster exits, quicker returns, and cleaner handovers, where agility, caution, and timing rule the boardroom, noted Shivakumar.
“Candidates reneging at the last moment are becoming more and more conspicuous,” said Jyoti Bowen Nath, managing partner at executive search firm Claricent Partners.
Experts said this is also due to enduring demand for seasoned C-suite professionals and a supply shortage.
“Leadership hiring across most sectors continues to be buoyant despite the ambiguous geopolitical environment. Perhaps a hint of caution, but definitely the C-suite is seeing ample movement,” said Nath. “Due to candidates being spoilt for choice, we are seeing last minute back-outs, and in many cases, the counteroffers are coming from the current employer in a bid to retain their stars.”
Nath noted that “the unfortunate part is that the decision of dropping out is communicated too late in the day to the search partner or the potential partner, and in some cases, on the day of joining.” “This can be very unsettling as companies lose out on lead time since most candidates anyway have a three months’ notice,” she said.
“More often than not a CXO declines an opportunity due to personal reasons. A new industry, locational change, and a high attrition rate are reasons which make them look elsewhere,” according to the HR head at a Delhi-based conglomerate, who asked not to be named.
These decisions—controversial as it may seem—reflect the evolving reality, and only self-preservation may be the strategic move of all, said a board member of a company.
On their part, search firms—to minimise last-stage risks—are advising clients to keep a strong ‘second’ candidate ready and waiting even after an offer is successfully made.
“But more often than not corporates don’t invest time in doing this, and when the selected candidate backs out at the last minute, it’s back to reinventing the wheel,” said Nath. “Often in such cases, due to the lead time lost, companies move internal candidates even though they are not ready for the role, only in the interest of time, and often such experiments fail.”
Recently, the candidate for a chief human resources officer (CHRO) role rejected a lucrative opportunity just days before joining as his present employer retained him with a competitive offer. The reason cited was that the executive’s family was not endorsing the relocation.
Nath also noted a few cases of candidates withdrawing due to political ambiguity, and uncertainty over the impact of the Trump administration's policies, leaving candidates worried about venturing out of their comfort zones.
You may also like
'Must unite for legal battle': Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin writes to non-BJP states, accuses Centre of plotting against SC's governor verdict with Presidential reference
Aishwarya, Abhishek & Aaradhya groove to Kajra Re – Watch
Nia Sharma embraces her desi side as she tries milking a buffalo for the first time
Nancy Tyagi pays tribute to her mother with a two-piece couture set at Cannes
Caitlin Clark has scary message for WNBA rivals after blitzing Angel Reese
