LinkedIn Talent Solutions data puts the figure at somewhere between 70 and 80 percent. That is the proportion of senior roles — director level and above — that are filled before a job advertisement is ever written. The number has been cited so often it risks becoming background noise. It shouldn't. If you are a senior professional conducting a job search through conventional channels, that statistic describes the size of the market you are not in.

This article is about the other market. The one that runs in parallel to the one you can see.

Why This Market Exists

It exists because hiring at senior level is not a transactional process. It is a risk management exercise.

When a board or executive committee needs to fill a leadership position — a CFO, a Managing Director, a Chief Operating Officer — their primary concern is not finding a long list of qualified candidates. Their primary concern is not making a catastrophic hiring mistake. A bad appointment at this level costs organisations between one and three times annual salary in direct costs alone, before you account for team disruption, lost clients, and the time tax on senior colleagues who absorb the gap. PwC's CEO Survey data consistently shows that leadership capability and succession risk sit near the top of the board agenda. They are not going to hand that problem to a job board and wait.

So they do what they have always done at the top of the market. They ask someone they trust.

That conversation — "do you know anyone who could do this?" — is where the unadvertised market begins. It moves through retained search relationships, through cross-sector networks built over years, through introductions made between people who have sat across negotiating tables and boardroom tables and know what the other person's judgment is worth. By the time a hiring committee has had three or four of those conversations, they usually have two or three names. If one of those names is available and interested, the process ends there. The role never gets advertised. The shortlist never forms. The interview panel never convenes.

Mergers, Acquisitions, and the Leadership Decisions That Never Get Announced

There is a category of unadvertised opportunity that sits even further from public view than the standard hidden market. It operates inside corporate transactions — mergers, acquisitions, management buyouts, restructurings — and it accounts for a significant proportion of senior leadership movement at any given moment.

When two organisations merge, or one acquires another, the immediate public focus is on the financial terms. The deal value. The strategic rationale. What no one outside the room sees is the parallel conversation happening throughout that process: who leads the combined entity, which existing board members survive the transition, where the gaps are, and who fills them. Those decisions are made — and frequently acted upon — months before the transaction becomes public knowledge. The leadership structure of a post-merger organisation is rarely assembled after completion. It is negotiated during it.

This matters for candidates in a specific way. A senior professional who becomes aware of an M&A transaction after it is announced is already too late to be part of the leadership conversation. By the time the press release is released, the key positions have been earmarked. The people who were already in the acquiring organisation's field of view — already known to the advisers sitting at the table during deal execution — are the people who get the call.

Why M&A Experience Produces Market Intelligence That Recruitment Cannot

Search firms and career consultants who work exclusively in recruitment operate on a single information feed: the mandates they are handed. Their knowledge of the market is, by definition, reactive. A company decides to hire. They receive the brief. They begin the search. Everything they know about what that organisation needs, they know because someone told them — after the decision was already made.

The intelligence that comes from sitting inside live M&A transactions is categorically different.

During the course of a corporate transaction — due diligence, negotiation, integration planning — the leadership capacity and gaps of an organisation become visible in real time. You see which executives are performing under pressure and which are not. You understand the strategic direction of the combined entity before the market does. You hear, directly, what capability the acquirer believes it is missing. That is not secondhand market data. It is primary intelligence, gathered at the point where decisions are actually being made.

My background spans both environments. Retained executive search and board-level M&A advisory are not separate disciplines that occasionally intersect — they are, at the senior level, the same conversation viewed from different chairs. The market intelligence that informs how I position candidates, which organisations I approach on their behalf, and which leadership transitions are imminent — that intelligence comes from being present during transactions, not from reading about them afterwards. Most search consultants do not have that access. They have never been invited into those rooms. They are working with the same publicly available information as the candidates they claim to advise.

That is a fundamental constraint. It is rarely acknowledged in the industry, because acknowledging it would require admitting that most executive career advisory is conducted at arm's length from the decisions it is supposed to influence.

The Scale of What You Can't See

The figures on unadvertised senior roles vary slightly by sector and study, but the directional finding is consistent across every piece of research I have encountered in thirty years of operating in this space. LinkedIn's own Economic Graph research — the most comprehensive dataset on professional hiring at scale — puts senior-level unadvertised hiring consistently above 70 percent. In certain sectors (financial services, professional services, private equity-backed businesses) the proportion is higher. According to SHRM, 80 percent of senior openings are never publicly advertised at all. The more senior the role, the more likely it is to be filled through relationship and referral rather than open competition.

The implication is not that job boards are useless. For roles below a certain seniority threshold, advertised routes work. The implication is that above that threshold, continuing to rely on them is a strategy that locks you out of the majority of what is actually available. You are fishing in a pond that contains, at best, 20 percent of the fish.

Most senior professionals know this, abstractly. The difficulty is that the unadvertised market has no front door. You cannot browse it. You cannot search it. You cannot set up an alert and wait for it to come to you. It is not a database — it is a set of relationships, operating continuously, in which your name may or may not be in circulation at any given moment.

Who Gets Access — And How

Access to the unadvertised executive market is not a function of seniority alone. Very senior professionals who have spent the last decade in a single organisation, focused entirely on delivery, with no deliberate attention to their external market presence, are frequently invisible to the people making senior hiring decisions — even if their track record is exceptional.

Access is a function of three things.

Narrative clarity. The people who get calls — who get mentioned when a CFO role comes up in conversation — are the people whose professional identity is unambiguous. Not people who are "good at lots of things." People who are known for something specific. In thirty years of board-level work, I have observed this pattern without exception: the candidates who surface in hiring conversations are the ones whose positioning is clear enough that someone can describe them in a sentence. Hiring committees and search partners do not recommend people they cannot pitch.

Network visibility. This is not about the size of your LinkedIn network. It is about whether the right people — search partners, non-executive directors, sector advisers, the operators who sit at the intersection of multiple organisations — know who you are and what you are looking for. Most senior professionals have a far smaller effective network than they believe. The people who will remember their name in a relevant conversation are often fewer than ten.

Documented positioning. At the unadvertised level, a CV is rarely sufficient. A CV is a record of where you have been. It does not answer the question a hiring committee is actually asking, which is: what would this person do here, and why should we trust them to do it? The professionals who move efficiently through the unadvertised market are the ones who have invested in how they are described and introduced — not just in what they can produce on request. The document that does this work is a Career Memorandum — written from the hiring side of the table, not the candidate side, and structured around the decision the reader is trying to make.

What Candidates Get Wrong When They Search for It

The most common error I see is activity substituted for strategy.

A senior professional becomes aware that the unadvertised market exists. They decide they need to access it. They attend more networking events. They connect with search firms. They post more on LinkedIn. They update their CV. They have conversations with former colleagues. All of this generates movement — the feeling of a search in progress — without necessarily moving them closer to the market they are trying to reach.

The problem is not effort. It is that the unadvertised market does not respond to volume. It responds to positioning.

A search partner is not going to recommend someone whose narrative they cannot pitch, regardless of how many times that person has followed up. A board-level contact is not going to make an introduction on behalf of someone whose value they cannot articulate in thirty seconds. The unadvertised market runs on trust and specificity. Quantity of contact does not substitute for quality of positioning.

The second error is timing. Most candidates begin working on their market positioning when they are already in a search — when the urgency is highest and the runway is shortest. That is the worst possible time to start. The professionals who access this market efficiently are the ones who have been maintaining their positioning continuously, not just when they need something. By the time a search becomes urgent, the preparation work should already be done.

The Information Asymmetry Problem

Here is the structural difficulty with the unadvertised market.

The hiring side has information the candidate side does not. A retained search partner knows which boards are planning leadership changes months before those changes are announced. A well-connected non-executive director knows which organisations are restructuring, which CEOs are under pressure, which sectors are consolidating. An M&A adviser sitting inside a live transaction knows which leadership positions are being reconsidered as part of the integration plan — before the deal closes, before the announcement, before anyone on the outside has any reason to suspect the conversation is happening. That information circulates within a relatively small professional community. Outside that community, it is invisible.

Candidates, by contrast, are making decisions — about which organisations to target, which search partners to cultivate, how to position themselves — with almost none of this information. They are navigating a market while largely blind to the forces actually shaping it.

This is not a minor disadvantage. Harvard Business Review research on hiring decision-making consistently finds that information asymmetry between candidates and hiring organisations has a material effect on outcomes — not because better-informed candidates are more qualified, but because they are better positioned to present their qualifications in the context that actually matters to the decision-maker.

Closing that gap — giving candidates the perspective of someone who has operated on both sides of the hiring equation for thirty years, across executive search and corporate transactions — is what the work I do is actually about.

The Consultant Who Has Never Sat at the Table

There is a structural limitation in most executive career advisory that rarely gets stated directly.

To advise a candidate on how to enter a board-level conversation, it helps — considerably — to have had board-level conversations. To prepare someone for the dynamics of a senior interview, it helps to have sat on the other side of that table and made hiring decisions under real conditions. To position someone credibly into the unadvertised market, it helps to be operating in that market continuously — not as an observer, but as a participant.

Most recruitment consultants and career coaches have not done this. They have studied it, built frameworks around it, attended the conferences. They can tell you what the research says about senior hiring decisions. What they cannot give you is the intelligence that comes from being present when those decisions are made — when an acquisition is in progress, when a board is restructuring, when a leadership transition is being negotiated in real time.

Candidates are brought into organisations to add value at the highest level. To steer the business through complexity. To sit in exactly those rooms. The advisers who help them get there should be operating at the same altitude — not standing outside it.

The unadvertised market rewards candidates who understand the perspective of the people doing the hiring. It follows that the advisers best placed to help them are the ones who have actually held it.

How the Market Is Actually Navigated

The professionals who move efficiently through the unadvertised executive market share a set of practices that are learnable, not innate.

They invest in their positioning before they need it. The Career Memorandum — the document produced at the start of every Reverse Headhunting engagement — is not a replacement for a CV. It is the document that introduces an executive to a hiring committee in the framing that makes sense to that committee. Written from the hiring side, not the candidate side. The difference in how it lands is significant.

They map their target market explicitly. Not "companies I would like to work for" — a structured analysis of sectors, organisation types, geographies, and size parameters against which a targeted outreach can be planned and executed. The unadvertised market is a set of relationships. Relationships require a target. Without one, the effort disperses.

They maintain network presence continuously, not episodically. This does not require constant posting or attendance at every industry event. It requires that the right people have current information about where you are, what you have done recently, and what you are interested in next. Fifteen to twenty relevant contacts, kept informed with deliberate regularity, is more valuable than five hundred connections who have not heard from you in two years.

They approach the interview differently. A board-level interview is not an audition. It is a strategic conversation between two parties who are both evaluating each other. Candidates who understand this — who arrive having done serious preparation on the organisation's current pressures, strategic position, and leadership gaps — perform categorically differently from candidates who arrive having prepared answers to standard questions. According to HBR (2023), candidates who approach senior interviews with structured preparation are 2.6 times more likely to receive an offer. The room reads differently when the candidate is operating at the level the role demands.