𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗶𝘀𝗺 is everywhere in recruitment

𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗶𝘀𝗺 is everywhere in recruitment. There, I've said it

In my 22+ years as a search and selection consultant, I’ve seen it all. While age discrimination laws are clear, the reality inside the recruitment process for manufacturing leaders is often... "filtered."

Sometimes it’s inferred through subtext. But you might be surprised how often it is explicitly stated in a brief. I’ve sat across from hiring managers and heard:

"Once they get to that age, they just won't have the energy or hunger to deliver."

"They aren’t a 'culture fit' for our young, vibrant team."

"They lack the 'battle scars' needed for this role" (too young).

"They’re part of that 'entitled' generation" (too young).

Aside from making me incredibly uncomfortable, these assumptions are statistically and practically hollow. After recruiting hundreds of leaders, I can tell you with certainty age is not a determining factor of success.

Now their are plenty of well publicised 'young' CEOs who are extremely successful. And, on the flip side, I regularly shortlist "older" candidates who have bags more energy, drive, and mental agility than counterparts half their age.

When we rely on birth years to determine capability, we aren't just being biased, we’re being lazy.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗮𝗴𝗲-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗿𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹𝘀:

𝗘𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘁, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲

"𝗖𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝘁" 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝘀𝗸: It's frequently used to justify hiring people who look and think exactly like the current team, killing cognitive diversity.

𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝘀. 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆: True leadership isn't about how many years you've clocked; it’s about your ability to adapt that experience to tomorrow’s problems.

If you’re still recruiting based on a "target age range," you aren't just breaking the spirit of the law, you’re actively filtering out the best talent in the market.

Simon Owens, Director, Kaizen Talent Solutions simon@kaizen-ts.co.uk