The Situation

One of the largest construction groups in the country operated five regional business units. Four were thriving. The fifth—a $300M civil infrastructure unit—was bleeding. Margins had fallen from 9% to under 2% in two years, three major projects were behind schedule, and two of its best project directors had just resigned.

The CEO was clear: this wasn't a strategy problem or a market problem. It was a leadership problem. The unit needed a VP of Construction who could stop the bleeding, win back the field's confidence, and deliver. The previous VP had been promoted internally and was strong technically but couldn't lead at scale. The board had given the unit eighteen months.

What We Found

The role looked simple on paper, but the real challenge was the candidate profile. The unit didn't need a caretaker—it needed a turnaround leader who had personally rescued troubled civil projects, could command respect from grizzled superintendents, and had the financial discipline to rebuild margin without gutting the team.

Those leaders are rare, and almost none were actively looking. The strongest candidates were already running successful units elsewhere and had no reason to take a call about a failing one. A standard job posting would have surfaced exactly the wrong profile: people available because they weren't performing.

We also knew that technical credentials alone wouldn't predict success. The last VP had an impeccable résumé. What he lacked was the leadership wiring to manage under pressure and hold people accountable.

What We Did

We ran a confidential, direct-approach search built around the specific challenge—not a generic VP profile.

We mapped the market for proven turnaround operators. Rather than posting the role, we built a target list of VPs and senior directors who had personally led troubled civil and infrastructure projects back to profitability. We approached them discreetly—none were on the market, and three of our four finalists had never responded to a recruiter before.

We assessed leadership, not just résumés. Every finalist completed a full psychometric assessment measuring decision-making under pressure, accountability, and how they lead teams in crisis. This is where we screened out the candidate the client initially favored: brilliant on paper, but the data showed a conflict-avoidant style that would have repeated the unit's exact failure pattern.

We pressure-tested the fit. We put finalists in front of the field leadership they'd inherit and structured deep reference conversations with people who had watched them manage real crises—not just former bosses, but peers and direct reports.

The Result

We placed a VP of Construction who had personally turned around two distressed units earlier in his career—a leader who had never once applied for a job and joined only because we framed the challenge as the kind of mandate he'd built his reputation on.

Within twelve months, the unit's margin recovered from under 2% back to 8%. The two delayed flagship projects were brought back on schedule, and not a single additional senior departure followed his arrival—the team that had been heading for the exits stayed and rebuilt under him.

The CEO later told us the placement saved the unit from being wound down. The candidate the client had originally favored—the one our assessment flagged—left his own company within a year amid a team revolt. The data had been right.