EP 151 Inside the Hiring Mind: What Security Recruiters Really Look For With Kathy Lavinder

In Conversation with Kathy Lavinder

In this powerful and wide-ranging episode, Yolanda “YoYo” Hamblen sits down with Kathy Lavinder, one of the most respected and experienced global recruiters in the physical security sector. With 25 years at the helm of her specialist search firm, Kathy brings clarity, honesty, and deep industry insight into the evolving world of security hiring.

Kathy reflects on the major shifts she’s seen across the industry: the diversification of candidate backgrounds, the rise of more inclusive leadership, and the growing integration of risk disciplines as organisations face more complex, asymmetrical threats. From anti-billionaire sentiment to geopolitical instability, she explains how modern security leaders must operate with eyes wide open to the world outside their door.

Together, Kathy and YoYo unpack the challenges candidates face — from the stigma around mental health disclosures to the discouraging reality of rejection and inconsistent interview processes. Kathy offers grounded advice on culture fit, navigating bias, and why structured interviewing is essential for fairness.

She shares frank guidance on using AI for CVs, preparing for interviews, researching companies properly, and why resilience is an overlooked but vital attribute for anyone on the job market. Kathy also breaks down the myth of “identical candidates,” explains why job descriptions can be problematic, and reminds applicants that interview success depends on aligning their message with what the organisation actually needs.

From the recruiter’s side, Kathy is refreshingly open about the importance of being an honest broker — transparent with candidates, loyal to clients, and committed to integrity over shortcuts. She also offers straight-talking perspective on US hiring realities, including current visa limitations.

This is a must-listen for anyone hiring, interviewing, or navigating their next career step in the security profession. Kathy’s wisdom lands with practicality, humanity, and clarity — a standout conversation on the realities of recruitment in our industry today.

BIO

Kathy Lavinder is the Founder and Executive Director of Security & Investigative Placement Consultants, LLC., (SI Placement) a retained executive search firm. She has 25 years of experience identifying and placing high level security management, investigators, intelligence specialists, and related personnel. Lavinder’s clients have included multinational corporations, financial institutions, academic institutions, healthcare organizations, professional service firms, and the family offices of high-net-worth individuals, as well as NGOs and non-profits in the U.S. and internationally.

Lavinder began recruiting in January 2000 after working in corporate investigations and journalism.  In a career that has bridged these worlds, Lavinder has developed unique insights and extensive contacts. Lavinder is frequently quoted in national publications on security and talent acquisition topics. 

 https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathy-lavinder/

Security Circle ⭕️  is an IFPOD production for IFPO the International Foundation of Protection Officers

Transcript

0:01

If you enjoy the security circle podcast, please like share and comment or even better. Leave us a fab review We can be found on all podcast platforms. Be sure to subscribe. The security circle every Thursday. We love Thursdays. Hi, I'm Yolanda And welcome to the Security Circle Podcast, produced in association with IFPO, the International Foundation for Protection Officers. This podcast is all about connection, bringing you closer to the greatest minds, boldest thinkers, trailblazers, and change makers across the security industry. Whether you are here to grow your network, spark new ideas, or simply feel more connected to the world of protection and risk, you are in the right place wherever you are listening from. Thank you for being a part of the Security Circle journey..

Yoyo 1:12

Well, Kathy nda, thank you so much for joining us on the Security Circle podcast. How are you?

Kathy 1:19

I'm well, thank you for having me.

Yoyo 1:22

It's really good to have you on to talk about recruiting because certainly over the last few years there has been a huge amount of sea change, certainly in the challenges and struggles, both from a hiring manager's perspective and from being an applicant's perspective. And I'd like to talk to you about some of those and some of the, the sort of pitfalls to avoid you've been the, the founder of a, a recruiting firm for 25 years now. Tell me what sort of major shift changes have you seen in the 25 years you've been doing this?

Kathy 1:54

Well, there have been a lot. I think the macro trend that I would point to first is that there is, um, kind of a rethinking of the traditional on-ramp into, private sector security management roles. Traditionally, it was. Through, public sector or military careers, whether it be in law enforcement in the us it may have been FBI or Secret Service or diplomatic Security through the State Department. I know in the uk it's more common through a military background. But what we've seen over the last, 10 years really is a movement toward, accepting people who have different backgrounds, who their foundational experience might. Been corporate, entirely corporate. They may have started in some place other than corporate security and, and just an open-mindedness that probably did, you know, has displaced some of the traditional thinking. I realize that's not great news for people coming into the, private sector community from those, public sector underpinnings. But the reality is that there has been that major shift in thinking. Otherwise, I would just say that certainly we've seen more diverse candidates assume leadership positions. That's another big trend and I think that will continue for obvious reasons. And certainly we've seen more. People who are diverse, whether by gender or racial or just lived experience, be attracted to this sector as a career. And, um, they bring different perspectives. So I think there's a kind of a more broad mindedness out there, and I consider those two, important trends that ultimately have a good outcome for everybody.

Yoyo 3:40

We have seen, I'm sure you've seen them, Kathy, a number of different prevalent, uh, relevant. Figures in the kind of big company space who are all saying, you know, why it's important to have diversity. Not only just diversity in appearance and gender, for example, but diversity of thinking thought and how important it is. And it's good that we're having good, strong advocates, like that. What other key messages are you seeing out there right now from the biggest hiring leaders?

Kathy 4:16

Well, I think everybody is trying to think more holistically and in an integrated fashion about risk. Um, risk cannot be siloed. It should not be, and it's not effective if it is. And I, I think they're also just trying to think about asymmetrical risks and, evolving risks and trends and, certainly. Organizations exist in the world in which they operate. And you cannot ignore the big, bad world at your doorstep, right? It, you cannot create a fortress. You cannot close off your environment. You cannot, you know, isolate yourself into a lesser risky setting. So I think there's a real. Openness now to thinking about how do you manage risk within this framework of things appearing at your door, for instance, things that you did not anticipate, things that were just so outside the realm of, likelihood and now they're happening. One example might be the, the attack in Manhattan on, in late July. Where an active shooter appeared, at the front doors of a major office building, with some very high profile tenants and with a grievance. But obviously a number of people were killed in that event. They had nothing to do with the issue of the assailant. But, they were no less, the victims. And I think it also shattered some ideas about safety and security. When you think that you've created a really impenetrable or, you know, it's probably not actually a impenetrable, but a highly, defended kind of exterior that will mitigate and prevent, you know, things like this. And you have to rethink them all of a sudden. So there is, in tandem. This focus that's negative attention on CEOs and high profile individuals, as well as the ultra high net worth community, that was reflected in the attack last December. The assassination of the healthcare executive on the streets of Manhattan by someone who actively sought him out. And, that brings home. The risk, elements that I think many organizations just really had not kind of wrestled to the ground sufficiently. And now they're dealing with all of those. And then you talk about, you know, political instability, geopolitical risks, the rise of, you know, right wing and author of author. Authoritarian governments. I knew I'd get that out eventually, but, um, all of that means that the world's problems are at your doorstep and you can't ignore them.

Yoyo 7:16

So I want, I mean, you were talking about anti billionaire sentiment, and we mentioned this in our pre-chat. Why do you think anti billionaires, sentiment is. More relevant now than it's ever been. And as even as I'm saying that, Kathy, I'm finding myself thinking they're not really doing an awful lot to endear themselves to everybody right now.

Kathy 7:38

Well, you know, listen, I think the internet has created this. Environment where people, if you want to gather information about people's compensation, their lifestyle, their activities, their interests, their political leanings, their possessions, how they're living, what they're doing, their decision making, you can, you can become, you know, an investigator, in front of your own computer and you can compile all this information and I think. The information. Well, you know, I'm in favor of obviously. Publicly available information. What I think has happened, uh, post pandemic is there are a lot of individuals who are very isolated, who are very disgruntled, who maybe have mental health challenges and they're, you know, armchair investigators who are cobbling together this information and creating a sense of personal grievance over various things and directed toward various individuals and organizations and leaders. And um, and that's kind of a toxic stew that has brought us to this moment. And at the same time, I would say, you know, there's a wealth divide in many countries, not just the developed world, but, um. There's a feeling of the rich getting richer and the poor losing ground. And so I think when you add that into the fact that you know, so much publicly available information is now available and it can, you know, foster. Uh, deep resentment and maybe unhinged activities, um, that, that it's, you know, not the genie out of the bottle. And I don't know that that's going to, um, diminish in frequency, unfortunately. So I think, you know, people who are in high profile positions who are obviously among the ultra wor um, high net worth individuals, the very wealthy business executives, I think that's now the new reality. And you, you have to prepare for that.

Yoyo 9:39

I mean, along with that comes responsibility, but you mentioned mental health and I'm really glad you did. This is a really good segue, um, in the security industry, especially the roots into security that we discussed, usually from the military or policing comes along with it, a journey of mental health. And I would like your professional take. I mean, if po you know, it has a huge, involvement in security mind matters.. It's our kind of arm of mental health for our industry. And so I have to ask the question. I have to imagine myself, listening and having a mental health challenge going through the recruitment process and knowing that if I see my own mental health challenges as a barrier to my success, then communicating them to a potential employer is surely going to. Be the same, a barrier to my success. How important is it to be honest and open about mental health in the interview stage? Or should people resist the temptation to discuss their mental health challenges?

Kathy 10:48

You know, some of the stigma around mental health challenges has diminished, but I think the reality is you never know, the viewpoints or perspectives of the interviewer, right? So I would say, you know. I would advise against leading with that or being super forthcoming about it. Let the person get to know you as a professional first. Talk about what you've accomplished and what you've done and what you're good at, and all the positives. And then as things progress, and maybe you're going further and further in the interview process. They're talking about culture. I think culture is the way into that conversation. Where you say, a supportive positive culture is very important to me. I've had some mental health challenges along the way, and I'm hopeful that this is an environment that doesn't see that as an impediment, but just sees it as a different dimension to me as an individual.

Yoyo 11:52

A lovely way of articulating that, Kathy, I really appreciate that. Let's talk about hiring managers. I tend to learn in the echo chamber that I have here, this beautiful echo chamber that is a security circle. Guests and associates that, you know, hiring managers quite often see. Hiring somebody in their team as a pain, you know, it's a pain point for sure. It's a, something that's a necessary evil. They have to do it. They focus on other jobs, other priorities, other KPIs, other SLAs, other outputs that really hiring somebody and the length of time it takes to go through that process, it's just a bull lake, right. When you are dealing with that kind of very busy hiring manager. What's the best way to approach this from a, from your perspective? In the sense of getting the best out of them in terms of what they're looking for in, in their applicants.

Kathy 12:51

You know, I have to say that I don't encounter that very much. Oh, you're so lucky. I know. I'm very lucky because I think most people see hiring as an opportunity to bring talent into the fold, right? To add people who have new capabilities and different dimensions and maybe fresh views and all of that. I don't think I'm a Pollyanna. I don't think I'm living in some sort of a, you know, dream world. I just find that smart hiring managers tend to see that this is a, an important, thing for them to do and do well. And when they turn to us as recruiters to help them find top talent, they're genuinely excited about talking with people who bring different perspectives and have. Different lived experiences and, um, different approaches to managing risk. And, um, so it's usually a very positive experience and I, I really haven't encountered the person who I would say is kind of doing it from a, the standpoint of, uh, it's an obligation, a chore. Um, I think most, smart hiring managers who are, you know, still really engaged, are not burnt out. They're just excited about this opportunity, so I'm sure they're out there. I just don't think that I've encountered them very often at all. I can't even think of any instance where that's the case. I think most people are. Open-minded and looking at, talent with excitement and potential and, and so therefore it makes for a very positive experience for everybody.

Yoyo 14:31

So, um, I certainly can say firsthand experience, although, you know, a few years old now that I found that job descriptions were, it was like chat, GPT wrote them, and I'm starting to find that job descriptions are rather over-engineered. Sometimes you just want to know what it is they're looking for. And there's all of this kind of what I call corporate spiel. I'm seeing it a lot. I'm seeing it in the same way. You know, it's almost like we are trying to translate what that company is looking for rather than really see it very clearly, or maybe it's deliberately obtuse to attract a broader audience. And then there have been occasions where the role itself It's really for two or three people to do. They are combining a whole range of skill sets that really is a cheap way of hiring someone to do a couple of jobs. Have you come across this at all and have you had to provide guidance to hiring teams on how they're approaching these types of roles?

Kathy 15:32

You know, I have heard candidates that, people I know who have come across, you know, my, radar who have taken jobs and who have said, one, the job description was not an accurate representation of what they were hired to do. And two, they really have been with doing the job that was, you know, two people previously., I think Those are two reasons that I see most often, that people are very unhappy once they've landed somewhere that they feel like they were sold a bill of goods and they're expected to carry a portfolio that's unrealistically. Over full. I don't usually see that in the roles that we recruit for. I think because we try to address anything on the front end by saying to them, you know, really, let's talk about your organizational structure. Can we see your org chart? Can we talk about who does what so we can help understand that? And then we might say, you know, the elements that you have right here are not typically. Combined with these elements. So perhaps you should think about moving those off the job description and elsewhere in your organization. We can have those candid conversations I think, in, almost all cases because they wanna hear from us about. Where similarly situated organizations are, positioning responsibilities, how they're describing them, how they're, expecting teams to operate, and they get a little bit of that window at the same time they get our candidate sourcing capabilities. So I think. We're in a good position in that regard. I think where I see difficulties with job descriptions sometimes is that they make so many requirements about must have. That they've. In effect curtailed and shrunk the pool to the point where, you know, it's a very small, talent pool that could actually fit this description, and ultimately that's gonna be counterproductive. I think the thing that we counsel as we get further and further into a search is to be. A little more open-minded, a little more open to asymmetrical candidates, to candidates who might not have 10 for 10 of the key responsibilities, but might have eight for 10. Or might just bring you know, something that's entirely different, to the table that we think can still address the fundamental needs. So a job description should not be a straight jacket. It should be a roadmap.

Yoyo 18:15

When the interview's gone really well and cv for cv, you've got identical candidates who really on paper are. There's nothing much between them, and then you meet them and there's nothing much between them. It always boils down to which person's gonna fit in, and that fitting in or being a part of the culture is a very ambiguous set of judgment. It's usually formed from biases. What do you advise in this case? Because I know that it affects normally people, normally women or people of a visible ethnic minority. It would affect them more than it would. It's difficult question.

Kathy 18:57

I, I'm going to challenge you on the candidates being identical. They're not, they're people, they're very different. They're very. Their communication files will be different. Their backgrounds will be different. Yes, they may have core competencies that align with the job description equally well, but at the same time, um, you know, finding the people who have the core capabilities, the requisite experience. That's always the easy part in a search, uh, because there are a lot of subject matter experts. There are people who have done X, Y, and Z over the course of their career. But where I imagine that we earn our fee, uh, is helping clients navigate the cultural fit and the cultural fit is very important. And that does come down to stylistic things, to communication approaches and um, and just. Kind of, um, uh, let's say ease of interactions, right? And, uh, uh, listen, I think there's a lot less bias than maybe you perceive, uh, because I see an open-mindedness, uh, not a closed off, uh, approach, uh, to people who come from different backgrounds. And I think it's just about. You know that one moment in time where a sequence of people have spoken to this individual and they just get, uh, kind of a feeling and a, and a strong sense that they could work well with these individuals. Right. And that's really the metric. Can I see this person succeeding in our organization? Uh, because we're collaborative, we're matrixed in our decision making. We're looking for, um, um, an influencer educator, not somebody who wants to institute a command and control environment. Uh, you know, these are all common things that, that, uh, organizations are looking for. And we just have maybe, um, a consensus around the. Individual because of the examples they've given, the conversations they've had, um, the references maybe have re re-affirmed that as well. And, um, and so, um, I, I think it's. Um, it's a journey of discovery. Every search is, and it's a two-way street. Uh, candidates are learning just as the organizations who are conducting the interviews are learning. And, um, there is no, you know, guarantee that it's going to be, uh, 100% the best match. But I think you use your kind of, um. Your, uh, gut, your instinct and some of the other indicators that you're getting from other people on your team who've interviewed this individual or other stakeholders in your organization. And then some inputs from some references where they've been asked hard questions, not softball questions, right? And, uh, and then you make a decision on that basis. But it's a journey and it's a journey of discovery.

Yoyo 22:17

What sort of advice do you have for, uh, applicants who are at that process? You know, where they've gotta bring their CV up to date, it's encouraged to use agen ai, you know, like chat GPT, for example, but also the importance of not over-engineering or cv.

Kathy 22:35

I think you do need to be wary of that. I think it's okay to, um, use, uh, AI empower tools to help you, refine your resume, but I also don't think that you want. The, AI tools to present an unrealistic version of yourself, right? You can oversell yourself in that scenario and, you know. AI is just a tool. You know, I, I encourage anybody who's putting together a resume to socialize it with peers, former peers, former mentors, current mentors, former supervisors, family members who will be kind. I think it's, and positive and constructive. And do it that way to sort of get at the closest way that you can encapsulate you and your experience in that document as opposed to relying on, you know, big machine learning and all of the large language models that are out there because, they don't know you and they're not human. And they're just trying to process words in a way that may be counterproductive. So I caution, in regard to that, I'm okay with somebody using a resume. Writer as long as they get good work product from it. And I'm not too concerned about how the sausage is made as long as what comes out on the other end is a really nice, reasonable, realistic, representation of what you could do for a potential employer. And that's all. A CV or resume is. Right. It's harnessing your experience to show that you've done things that are particularly and, and directly relevant to their needs.

Yoyo 24:25

The last time I was interviewing, I remember, um, I remember it. I never thought of it as a hard or horrible thing and some people get very nervous, but I remember saying, you know, it's my favorite thing. I get to talk about me. Um, and it's, and it's, and you should almost look at it like that. It is a really cool opportunity for you to talk about you and when, most of the time it's not really, um. It's frowned upon to talk about yourself, but you have to have quite a lot of resilience being an applicant because there's an awful lot of rejection and I don't think really that there's a lot of transparency around the rejection process. There's not a lot of transparency around. Not just the rejection process, but also the feedback process, which sometimes can be absolutely non-existent. And sometimes it's because organizations don't want to enter into anything litigious. Understandable, right? But it is important in the process. To have resilience, you gotta think yourself as a model going for a job with Calvin Klein, you know, thinking, 23 models turn up and only two are gonna get that magazine cover. It is important to accept rejection. What would you advise candidates in terms of hardening up IE You know, it's a bit of a tough process sometimes.

Kathy 25:44

I agree. It can be very difficult. I always tell people, look, it's not you, it's them. They get to decide, right? It's not personal. It never is, right? It is not, a vote on you as a professional. They're trying to match the. Organization's needs to the person that they think can mostly meet those needs. So in an interview, you are allowed to talk about yourself, but I think you have to make sure that you talk about what you can do that's relevant for the organization. And I counsel people not to talk about. In the context of what you like to do, because quite honestly, no one cares what you like to do. They care what you can do for them, right? And that's very direct. And I realize that may not be what people want to hear, but in the hiring process, they're winnowing. And eliminating, people who they feel like are just not aligned in terms of either experience or capabilities or communication style or management style. You have to really make sure your messaging is aligned with what their needs are and you sublimate your needs in this scenario.

Yoyo 27:03

I can tell you, from my own personal experience, a couple of years ago, I got to the final stage with five or six companies, some big companies, some smaller startups, more entrepreneurial. All of the roles were equally good, in terms of what they offered. I made it to the final four or five. It's five or six times, and on each occasion it's hard. And not see the obvious when each of the applicants they hired that I was up against was a man. All right. And it, and the irony is the role that I did get, there were a higher number of women in the interviewing process and a higher number of women in the pillar structure. I ended up working for and I think I always advocated,'cause I love hiring myself. I've always genuinely thought I was very, very good at it and I don't, I'm not in a hiring position now, but I always made sure that I found somebody on my team, even if they were relatively junior,'cause it was good exposure for them to sit on the interview panel and be a part of that process. Somebody who would match as close as I could get to likeness. So if I was interviewing an African man, I would make sure I had my coolest, cleverest, successful African employee on that panel with me. It was incredibly important for me that those,'cause I worked for a very, very big brand that those applicants saw him, my guy. I thought, oh great. This is a place where I can feel comfortable. This is a place where I can fit into the culture. This is a place where I can succeed because there's other people like me who are succeeding. And I also found that my employee really benefited from the process and he understood why he was there. He understood that he was there to, to, as part of his self-development, his mentoring process, and how he was gonna adopt, new members of his own team. But I still find it challenging now to hear from my woman friends that there are no women in the interview process that they're going through. And therefore, subsequently, when they don't get through to final stages, it's because they don't feel that, they represent the likeness. When we hire in our own likeness systemically, we do, and that's a challenge. I think we shouldn't ignore it.

Kathy 29:31

maybe things are different between the UK and the us. I think being a woman in the US is a plus, right? And it's, there's just more receptivity to that. And I almost think you have, you know, half a leg up, on the, in the candidate pool if you represent some sort of fresh perspective, right? And you're a d and you can be a differentiator in terms of. Lived experience and approach to problem solving or management or whatever it is. Perhaps that's more a commentary on the UK than the us but, I'm not sure what else to say other than, I think the field is more level perhaps here.

Yoyo 30:13

Yeah, you might be right. I do think that America is far more in advance of certain other things. Like there are certain types of roles that are more established in the United States as well. But interestingly, the job that I got was with an American firm where, right, and so it's ironic, isn't it, that five or six businesses in the UK. With barely a man in the interview process. Get to four, five, or six final stages and, you know, lose at every single final hurdle. And then an American company., It was a completely different experience. But I also had a friend the other day, who told me,'cause I said,'cause I know she's in the interview process and I knew I was gonna be interviewing you. I said to her, what else have you been?'cause I'm, I've been out of this for a couple of years now, thankfully.'cause it isn't enjoyable being on the recruitment market. I'm gonna be very honest with you. We haven't even got to the evil seedy part of it yet, which we're heading to. But she said she went on an interview and she said she didn't get asked one question and I, you know, I did that kind of. Listen, it's, maybe it's not the right fit for you. Maybe it's a near miss, and you try and find a way to positively spin on it. But that's not a great experience for her, even with a big brand to, to get all keyed up and ready for a great interview process and not be asked. One question. Oh, sorry. There was one question. The question came right at the end and it was, do you have any questions for us?

Kathy 31:43

Oh. Yeah. You know, one of the things I say to certain organizations where I feel like they're flailing a little bit in terms of their interview process is to highlight the need for kind of a structured interview. The interviewer should not be talking as much as the interviewee. Right. And there should be some common themes across all interviews, right? Everybody, every stakeholder who is in the interview process so that there can be, some comparison to, what they heard, right? Otherwise, you know, one, maybe thinking, gosh, we really connected because we both like sailing. Or something, right? Something silly. And the other might be thinking, you know, we didn't really connect because when I asked this individual about this, they missed the point, or, you know, or they gave me an answer that I thought was really unsuitable for our environment. So. Garbage in, garbage out, right? That's what happens when you haven't prepared for the interview process. And I think more organizations need to think and take interviewing very seriously because it's not a casual conversation. It's not who do you know in common? It's not, you know, playing that name game and oh, you know, where did you punch your ticket? It's not that. And if you do that. You're going to have a less than good outcome, quite honestly.

Yoyo 33:20

I completely agree with you there. And I just said to her, I said, I genuinely think you've got a near miss. Like when I think back to those five or six companies that I got to the final stage of, I am so glad that I didn't get any of those jobs. Do you know what I mean? Because what I ended up doing was far, far better, far, far happier, you know, and I always look at them as near misses. I'm trying to sort of think, you know, what lessons am I supposed to learn here? Just I said to my friend, the lesson that you can learn is how it might not be your lesson for right now, it might be your lesson for later down the line in the sense of you thought that's what was coming your way, but the things that usually are meant for you don't go past you do they, Kathy?

Kathy 34:01

Right., I think the other, the near misses, as you call them, which is a good term, um, EE every interview you get better at interviewing. Right. And I never encourage people to take an interview just because they're kicking the tires. I think that's a waste of everybody's time, and I'm really opposed to that and I would never suggest anybody do that. And I'm not a person to try to. You know, strong arm, a candidate to go through the process, even if they're not really interested in taking the role. Maybe to help me fill out a slate., That's a terrible sloppy t you know. Crappy way to be recruiting, right? Yeah. And I have higher standards than that, but, I would say that some people do, that, and I think that's very unfortunate. It's counterproductive for the whole process. It's a time waster. But when you are seriously interested in the role and you're actively looking for a new position. Each interview, you refine your message. Each interview you get more crisp and cogent and, uh, prepared to talk about what you can bring to that organization. So there is a value there., I always tell people like, if you are always the bridesmaid and never the bride, then you really have to think about. What you're doing that can't close the deal, right? What can you do differently? What, what do you, where do you think you slipped up? Where do you think you fell down, and hurt your prospects? What are the external things that you can't control? So really do kind of a postmortem of those interviews and that process to get smarter about it and to be better the next time around. But, You know, for those people who are always kind of, oh, you made it to the very final, but you weren't selected. Sometimes I say to them, you know, maybe you need to do two sessions with a career coach. And by the way, resume, um, writers are one category. Coaches is another. Recruiters is a third. I don't do resumes. I don't, do coaching. But I do think that there could be some value in. Really only two sessions over video where you do role playing with a C career coach and you go through, a mock interview, and you then get some really sharp, constructive criticism. And there are all kinds of reasons why you're not, you know, able to close the deal. And I guarantee you those folks will pick up on it very quickly and not only identify the problem, but give you the solutions.

Yoyo 36:46

That's great advice, Kathy.'cause my, the next direction I was gonna go is in people who haven't interviewed much and I would always say I have people come to me and I mentor as well at the same time. But I've always said, you know, find somebody to do some, like, get chat GPT to give you some questions that pertain to your job role and send them to a pal and get them to interview you. It's a bit like. Rehearsing your elevator pitch, isn't it? Sure. It's knowing those maybe five things that are really important about you wanna try and find a way to get them into your responses. And just having a kind of framework like that of the key things that you, that are really important to mention about yourself. What else would you, what other than get a coach?'cause again, that thank you on behalf of all the listeners, that's great advice for people who haven't interview very much. What else would you suggest?

Kathy 37:40

Yeah, the preparation is the key. Job interviews have, generally moved into virtual settings, right? Usually the first interview will be via a video platform. Maybe you haven't done that. You have to make sure you're comfortable in that setting, that you're able to make eye contact, that you're able to, you know, move the conversation along at a pretty good clip, because in all likelihood, it's gonna only be 30 minutes, right? So there is no time for digressions or in the weeds, just really kind of a ous telling your story. That's not what an interview is these days. Yeah. No rabbit holes. Yeah, no rabbit holes don't drill any dry wells. Right. So do the preparation with researching the company. Reading absolutely everything you can about them. I think you probably have Glassdoor in the uk, but you know, Glassdoor in the US you can do some free searches there and you can often learn it's syn anonymized. A platform where individuals talk about companies, whether it's what it's like to work there, what it's like to interview there, what their compensation models are about. And you can really learn some interesting things about how they interview, how they hire, how they compensate, how. So look at Glassdoor and do your homework in that regard. But, you know, if it's a public company, I always suggest that you read their annual reports, that you look for news, articles, uh, read what their quarterly earnings were like, read what you know their contingent liabilities are.'cause contingent liabilities mean things that could come back and, uh, be very, a negative impact on the company. Know if they're in an, in a sector that's in decline or on the upswing. Understand their financial footing. Try to understand the, where this role fits within the organization. There's a lot of groundwork that you could do and should do if you really wanna be adequately prepared. I remember years ago, when I was doing a lot of work for hedge funds, and this was before I think many people knew what hedge funds were. But the first question the hiring manager would ask, somebody they were interviewing is, explain what a hedge fund does. And you'd be amazed at the number of people who could not say what a hedge fund is and what it does. And they were immediately disqualified. Maybe they would talk to them for 10 more minutes, but effectively had, you know, kind of bombed the interview at that moment in time.

Yoyo 40:11

I did that, I had that very same technique when hiring, cybersecurity analysts for a SOC and all the analysts. And it, it was, so this is such a good question because I said, how would you describe cybersecurity to your grandma? Because we needed to understand how their brains worked. Right. And it was just super funny how one particular candidate said, well, grandma. You know, you've got a PC that you use at home. Well, it's important that, you know, we lock that PC in the same way that we do lock our front doors. And he just went through this like analogy and he ended up getting the job. And it was a test of his communication skills, his reasoning skills, his problem solving skills, and just being able to understand, you know, what was asked, stop him. And it was such a good example. So, no, that, that's absolutely right. Look. Tough question for you this Kathy. The good, bad, and the ugly of being an honest broker.

Kathy 41:10

I think it's important to be an honest broker. Yeah. Mm. I consider that part of my job. Right. And I always, tell. Candidates, job seekers that, you know, my responsibilities lie with the hiring organization because they're my clients. I work for them, they pay me. I never accept any money from. Job seekers are candidates. And I have a fiduciary responsibility to the organization that's hiring, right? So if we're in salary negotiations, just be aware that I represent the hiring organization. Now I can listen. I want to be that go-between. I want to be the person who helps you bridge any divides there are. And so I tell people, look, if you're not happy with the, offer that's been put on the table. Tell me what you're looking for. I am that person who can do it with absolutely zero emotion and money is, you know, a very emotional topic for most people. I am gonna be the person who says, you know, this individual's really interested in the role, but they feel like it's undervaluing their experience and they. You know, 20,000 more for this position. And my client could say, well, that's out of, out of reach. That's not gonna happen, but you know, maybe we could do 10. And you know, you find that middle ground right. And I think that's what an honest broker is. That's what an honest broker does. And I also tell candidates. I'm always upfront with them about this. I will tell you everything I know about this organization, good, bad, or indifferent, and the bad could be. You know, they're slow to make decisions or they, they've had somebody in this role and it didn't work out. And here's my understanding of why it didn't work out. Or, you know, the hiring manager is, Pulled in a million different directions and may not be able to give you as much time and attention as you want in the process. But trust me, there will be people in the process further along who will answer your questions, right? So being an honest broker is, I think, essential to being successful as a recruiter and being that person who kind of, um, is. Not only being honest with job seekers, but honest with my clients and that, you know, I'll give you a recent example. I know this company has a very outgoing, friendly, you know, kind of culture and I said, you know, this. Person has a background in diplomacy, they're gonna be a little more buttoned up. Right? And it's not because they're not friendly, they're not warm, that's just who they are, right? That was their first career, their training. And you know, diplomacy is about how you carry yourself and how you sometimes just listen and you don't have an opinion. So just be aware of where they're coming from and I think that's fair, and helpful. Hoorah.

Yoyo 44:20

I was so enamored with what you were saying. I'm sitting here smiling while you are talking because I'm thinking, Kathy, you are just on my list, lady, that I feel like I would love to do business with you. And I'm wondering how many other people are thinking the same thing. And that's why I've completely lost my train of thought in terms of where I was going. Yeah. By the way, there is a little gripe here that us Brits have, whenever they see security operations manager. Security Operations Director, it's a role that both lends itself to cybersecurity as well as physical security. Mm-hmm. I always have to, specify. Yeah, yeah, yeah. What do we do about that? Because it,

Kathy 45:02

Either put in parentheses cyber or physical. Right, because I don't wanna waste anybody's time. And I don't work on cyber roles. I work on physical security roles. Cyber is its own big, big, big recruiting niche in this country. And, there are many cyber recruiters out there. And, a long time ago, maybe 10 years ago, I decided, unless it's a blended role, a CISO role that has a physical and a cyber portfolio. We're not going to do it because we don't have that domain expertise on the cyber side. I'm not gonna fake it until I make it. I don't think that's serving my clients well. And so I just simply, every single position I do. Stress that. And then if I put something on LinkedIn, and I don't usually put things on LinkedIn just because, I don't wanna be bombarded by people who are not responsive to the job I've posted, and I don't have time to, to deal with that. But if I do put something there, I usually have, and I know this is screaming, but I put all caps, this is not a cyber role. I love it. I, and then people still send me their resumes who were cyber people and I just, yeah, because they haven't looked. Yeah, they haven't looked, they haven't read it. They failed that test.

Yoyo 46:24

I know, and look, there aren't a lot of convergence roles out there, and this comes up quite a lot in mentoring because I'm always trying to encourage, physical security folk to move over into cyber like I did. And I'll be honest with you, I think it's the best thing I ever did. I also think, Kathy, you could be missing a little trick here because cyber, if we look at it as a big recruitment space, they are looking for more non-technical, people now than ever before. For example, I don't have a degree in cybersecurity. I don't have a degree in, in, in computer sciences., I'm a journalist and I'm a deliberate non-technical person. Mm-hmm. I'm a nerd translator. Mm-hmm. I help very technical people and I translate. What they're saying and make it into a reasonable proposition for the board or for pe, for decision makers and stakeholders. And those are essential roles. I agree. Yeah. Yeah., And we're now gonna see coming through an emergence of non-technical CISOs as well.'cause they'll be looking more at strategy. Um mm-hmm. I'm always trying to encourage physical security specialists because they've already got risk management. Head brains they're already in incident management. They already love governance, risk and compliance'cause they're doing it all the time with their checklists and their risk assessments. Mm-hmm. They've already done incident management and goodness knows, preparedness is oozing outta their paws. And because of this whole mindset of skills they have, they're already 75% of the way there to a non-technical cyber role. What's the convergence space looking like now? Is it less, two hats more one role, but with a duality of purpose, that's what we're looking

Kathy 48:04

for. Well, you know, we've been talking about convergence for 20 years and I still, and you know, I still think we work a lot with large, very complex organizations, and I think in many of those organizations, if not. Every single one. They're side by side. They're partners, but there are two distinct domains and there's a lot of, you know, action because of the overlapping area in the Venn diagram. I don't think that we're going to see organizations sort of move toward one or the other. I think that was tried in some organizations and then they've backtracked and, I just think that, given, you know, the size of my organization and the, limited time that I have and the number of like chief security officer roles that we're working on it any given time, we have to stick to what we know and do best and, and that's the physical security risk management leadership.

Yoyo 49:07

So what's coming down the line for you then, Kathy, to wrap up? You are obviously incredibly, I wouldn't hesitate to send anyone to you. I take it that, you know, you do have global roles, not just roles that,, would make it difficult for a Brit to apply to in the us. Although, with virtual working now on hybrid solutions, it's probably

Kathy 49:26

open to, it's not gonna happen in this environment, not with the current administration. You know, they're not giving out work visas except if, and they're even, you know, limiting those. There's now this$100,000. Work visa fee that organizations have to pay. So this is not the time for anybody in the UK who wants to come work in the us. It's like, let's, let's get real fee people. It's not happening. So you, you

Yoyo 49:51

heard it here first, Brits gang. I mean, look, we are listening to, I thought it was 909 cities around the world, but actually it's more like 2000 and something. For the Brits listening, uh,, they do make up a third of the listenership in Europe. Yeah, it's just, scrub off the United States just for this administration period. And review. Mm-hmm. Review. Review it to later date. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's good advice. It's good advice.'cause it stops people wasting their time. Lastly, Kathy, if you could wave a magic wand, What would you like to change that would make your job easier as a recruiter? When dealing with applicants in the future, what magical thing and potential applicants right now take away and think, okay, I know that people like Kathy are gonna be looking and needing this.

Kathy 50:36

You know, I don't think there is one thing. I think that. Probably the thing that I struggle with the most is the fact that,, people have the expectation that if they send me their resume, that I'm going to go out and find them a job. And that's not how it works, right? That is not my remit, that's not my role. I am working for employers who have needs and sometimes people get a little testy with me, like, you know, it's been three weeks since you acknowledged my resume. Where are the jobs? And it's No timeout. I explained it when you sent it to me that we work for employers. We're not out beating the bushes, so I don't like to be a nasty person. And I, I just want to know that, people realize kind of what the relationship is. And, I also at the same time want job seekers to know that I, if I had a magic wand, I could make everybody understand that. If I say no, that you know, you're not the right person for this role, I'm not doing it out of a sense of animus or. Prejudice or bias or whatever it is, it's an informed evaluation and decision making based on what I know about the client's needs. And sometimes people are reluctant to take that No. Right. Because like how dare you? You know, I was in the FBI for 25 years or whatever it is, right? And it's like. That's not the decision making point that that helped me to land where I land. I hope you can just respect that I made a decision that your background is not exactly what our client needs.

Yoyo 52:19

Tough, isn't it, Kathy? I mean, they're not exactly making themselves endearing enough to hire or get into your good graces by doing that. Anyway, IP before we would do that with you. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Kathy Lavinder what can I say? She's on LinkedIn. Everybody do connect if you haven't connected already. And you had all the advice there that you could possibly need, but I'm sure she won't mind if you reach out. No. Kathy, thank you so much for joining us on the security side. Sure. AB Podcast

Kathy 52:48

Connect. Thank you for, inquiring and good to see you. Take care.