Legal Department Compensation Revealed - John Gilmore, CEO Barker Gilmore (E69)

Curious about compensation trends for in-house legal roles? What are the different components of private company compensation, how do private equity companies structure equity, or how to evaluate a compensation offer? John Gilmore is a veteran executive recruiter. His firm, Barker Gilmore, conducts one of the industry’s most comprehensive surveys on in-house compensation. In this episode, John pulls back the curtain on compensation trends and how GC compensation benchmarks against other roles. He also shares strategies for negotiating compensation and how to nail tough interview questions about comp and other topics.

—

Listen to the podcast here

About John Gilmore

John Gilmore is the co-founder and Managing Partner of BarkerGilmore. With more than three decades of experience in executive search, John has skillfully navigated BarkerGilmore on its path to becoming the highest quality boutique in-house legal, compliance officer, and leadership advisory firm in the country. Dedicated to the advancement of others and functioning seamlessly across industries, John is a key advisor to many of the world’s most successful companies. Internally at the firm, John oversees the large and sophisticated recruiting function by heading up a team of high-performing executive search consultants. He is well known for his uncanny capacity to mentor and bring out the best in others.

John’s discretion and ability to move both quickly and effectively through the lifecycle of an executive search make him one of the most trusted and sought-after senior recruiting consultants in the industry. While leading Chief Legal Officer, General Counsel, and Chief Compliance Officer search assignments, often on a confidential basis, John partners closely with CEOs, CHROs, and Board Members of major organizations, including those of Fortune 1000, emerging growth, PE-owned, VC-backed, non-profit, and government entities.

Transcript

On this episode of The Legal Department, I’m excited to welcome John Gilmore, who is co-founder and Managing Partner of BarkerGilmore, which is an executive search firm for in-house and compliance talent in the legal field. John, how are you?

Very good. Good morning, Stacy. I appreciate you having me on your show.

I’ve been looking forward to this. We’re going to be talking about money, in-house compensation, and all the things related to that. I’m excited to pull back the curtain.

That sounds great. Making money was always a fun pastime of mine.

State Of The In-House Recruiting Market

We all like that. We were chatting a little bit before we got started. I try not to timestamp these episodes. I want them to be enduring, but we’re in a very uncertain economic time. It feels topsy-turvy with tariffs, budgets, shifting economic policy, and all the rest of it. I’m curious about the state of the in-house recruiting market. What are you seeing? What’s going on out there?

It’s so hard to predict what is going to happen. We’re watching these uncertain times. We’re watching the stock market go up and down. It’s somewhat scary at times watching, not knowing what’s happening. The great news, though, for in-house legal is that companies are relying more on in-house legal departments than ever before. The general counsel is viewed as a strategic business partner and an equal player to any of the other C-suite executives. We’re seeing the biggest demand we’ve ever seen for in-house counsel.

Surprisingly, in the first quarter, I closed eleven CCO searches for a boutique firm like ours. That’s a crazy number. Our team is full force. We’re working around the clock and delivering what our clients are looking for. At the same time, I’m not going to get full of myself saying life is grand. We never know what could happen next. The good news is that companies can’t live without the general counsel. Companies can’t live without the CCO. Companies are putting more pressure on chief compliance officers than ever before. With all the fluctuations in policy, international trade, and all these different things, good news for general counsel, lawyers, or compliance officers is that uncertainty means they’re needed more than ever before. We’re in good shape.

That’s encouraging. As you were talking about the big demand, I’m wondering if any of this is the Boomer retirement arc that we’re going to see over until 2030 or 2033? Do you think that has anything to do with it?

Retirements are a big part. In the Fortune 500 in 2024, we saw 68 new GCs out of the 500. Normally, it’s about a 10% number. It’s something in the 50s. In 2024, we saw 68. Thirty-five of those are replacements that came from being hired from outside. Thirty-three were promoted from within. Thirty-four of those positions were due to retirement. Eight were because the GC moved to another role. One thing we’re seeing is that the GC is a stepping stone to CEO, CHRO, or other business leads. There’s a decent amount of movement, more movement than we ever saw before in 2024 for the Fortune 500.

This is so much. I want to just grab everything you say and pull even more. From a jumping off point, your firm does several annual surveys, but one around comp. You were referencing some of the stats related to matriculation through the GC role at public companies. What I heard you say was a lot more internal movement than you’ve seen in prior years, and also a lot more folks using GC as a stepping stone, which I’m very curious about.

Because the GC role now is playing equal business-minded business partner and legal partner, people are looking for business forward, legal behind, versus the opposite of the old way of doing things. It does put a GC. In fact, we’re working on a search right now. When we start a search, we’re always looking for the key factors that make an opportunity attractive. The CEO said, “One of the things that is most attractive is that I see the lawyer, the general counsel, being the most likely to take my job when I leave.” GCs are earning a lot of respect with that dual role of business and legal. There’s a lot of opportunity inside.

How Candidates Can Be Business Forward

I’m an ambitious girl. You mentioned how the GC can be a stepping stone into those larger roles. How can a candidate present themselves as business forward? I am thinking about the resume because in a lot of what we do, we’re a support player. It’s hard to say, “I ran this P&L,” “I got these sales,” or whatever, because that’s not quite your role. As a recruiter, how are you distinguishing folks that look like they’re business forward?

One of the things, especially these turns on CEOs where they identify a business-forward person, is someone who speaks the numbers. You’re not speaking in generic. For example, when I joined this company several years ago, the EBITDA was this. This is how much it has grown year after year to where it is now. What is the revenue? General CEOs are very much attracted to people who’ve played a major role in the growth of the organization’s success, whether it’s revenue, EBITDA, or whatever it is. People who speak numbers instead of generic are a step ahead. First, be a numbers person. Don’t speak in generic terms, like “We doubled the EBITDA.”

We don’t want to know that. We want to know where it was. Where is it today? How have you increased profitability? How have you increased the growth of the company? It is being able to talk about one of our favorite interview questions, “Where have you brought the most value to the organization?” It is being able to speak, “Here’s where I specifically brought the most value.”

We placed a candidate, for example, at a Fortune 500 company, where the company he was with recently sold. They had a JV. They had an international partner. One of the things that he contributed to the sale of the company was that he got on a plane, flew, met the principals with the JV, and convinced them that the sale was the right numbers to take. He was involved with the multi-billion-dollar sale of the corporation. When we did our references, the CEO said, “Had it not been for our general counsel doing that, we never would have closed the deal.”

That’s great hardware to have on your wall.

It is about having specifics, not generic. Speak in specific terms. If you can share exact numbers, if it’s private companies, you might have to give roundabout numbers, but not trying to avoid the question with generics.

Compensation In Public Vs Private Companies

That’s a good tip. Let’s dive into numbers, money. Your firm does a couple of different salary surveys. We’re talking some about public companies, but a lot of GC roles are at private companies or PE portfolio companies. That data is not floating around out there. Can you tell us more about the different trends in compensation, both at public companies, private, and PE?

People who speak specific numbers instead of generic information are a step ahead in any recruitment process. Share on X

For the public company, we did see the year-over-year trend show come down a little bit as far as salary growth. In 2024, we only saw an average of 2.8% in the public company market. The private company was very similar to the number. When you’re talking about public versus private, we see a couple of different situations. We see maybe a founder-led private company, a VC-funded private company, or a private equity portfolio company. The compensation can be a bit different. When you look at compensation, you have base salary, target cash bonus, and then the long-term incentive. The way it works for a private equity portfolio company is this. Most of the time, when we sign on, they’re the general counsel of the PortCos.

The private equity sponsor buys a company. They want to upgrade the general counsel function, or maybe they didn’t even have a general counsel prior. Now, they’re looking to take it to $1 billion, $1 billion-plus, $2 billion-plus company, and they need a real GC. Maybe they were relying on outside counsel. The big negotiating factor is, “What is that equity component?” It is because you get a block of equity, they determine what that equity is worth today, and what that equity could be worth depending on the value of the transaction.

How To Vet Compensation Offers

I want to dig into that because I think lawyers aren’t good at math. We know that. That’s a generalization, but for folks who have not had an equity comp model, how can they diligence that? It sounds great, “When we exit, you’re going to get X percent, you get this many shares, warrants, or whatever.” They don’t see that bright, shiny thing of a payday in the future. What advice do you have for people to vet these offers?

The one question you can ask and talk about is the valuation of the company and how it has changed. For example, if a company’s valuation changed in the positive direction over the last year, all of a sudden, the equity award you might receive could be less because the equity is priced higher, and so the amount of equity is going to depend. If the valuation of the company is significantly less than it was, that can also be a red flag as far as whether this equity is going to materialize.

Is it anything, or is this fool’s gold?

Here’s the thing, too. When we’re placing a general counsel at one of these PortCos, let’s say they were purchased by one of the big private equity companies, they’re all hyped up. They did their due diligence. They believe this company is on a growth trajectory, and they expect major returns. Here’s what they want. They want a GC who can come in and tell the story of how they helped the company achieve major returns. Anyway, we’re getting off the topic of the equity component. You’ll receive an equity component and need to understand what this equity could be worth at a 3x or a 5x multiple. That’s what they’re usually shooting for, a 3x to 5x multiple. Sometimes, they like to brag, and they say, “We hit a 6x or a 7x.” That’s hitting the ball way out of the park.

It is understanding what the equity component you’re getting. It’s all apples and oranges from one company to the next because maybe $1 million in equity at one company is very different than what it could be worth at another company. It is understanding what their objectives are. Where is this company going? Are you looking for an IPO? Are you looking to be sold? Some PE PortCo are extremely profitable, and they’re in the long-term investment strategy of the private equity company. They’re not looking to sell at any time soon. You need to understand the exit strategy of the company and what my equity would be worth at different points based on that exit strategy.

When you’re interviewing for a job, you want to be enthusiastic about the company. You’re selling yourself. It strikes me that the candidate might need to be cautious or coached to ask these questions in a productive way and not a lawyer colonoscopy way.

Great point and reminder to everyone. The luxury of working with a firm like us is that I’m asking all those questions for the candidates before the candidate ever shows up for an interview, and I’m very candid. This is what was shared with me. If you’re going into one of these interviews blind, not knowing, obviously, that compensation question comes maybe in interview two or three, but not in the first interview. You need to go in mindful of the opportunity and be able to sell yourself. You gain that information along the way. If you’re working with a search firm, the recruiter should have already asked those questions and can give you some insight and what that equity component would look like. If you’re not, you’re going in on your own.

The opportunity and ability to attract yourself to the business, the leadership team, the culture, and all these different things have to be in place first, and then money second. It can be tough when you get to the finish line if the numbers aren’t what you’re expecting, but if you bring that out in the first component of your introductions to the company, you’re probably not going to be the right person.

Use the recruiter as a buffer. I could also see how you could ask what the company’s objectives are. That could be a rich conversation in a way to sell your business acumen during the interview process and not be a money-grubber.

It is about aligning with the exit strategy and the mission. Most CEOs have a mission. What are my objectives? What am I looking to do with this company? Those are great questions to ask early in the process.

There are three components in the equity, being the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, but lawyers like certainty. We don’t like gray. Most of us are risk-averse. What does the base look like on these?

You can’t stereotype it. It depends on the size of the organization and the company, but here’s where it mostly depends. It depends on what others on the executive leadership team are earning. From a compensation standpoint, where would you fit in best? For example, the others on the leadership team are making $350,000 base. You’re saying, “I’m looking for $425,000.” It’s not going to happen. It’s understanding, “Where do I fit in best with the structure of your executive leadership team from a compensation standpoint?”

Is that something the recruiter can suss out for us?

As recruiters, we know. First of all, that’s my exact question. I’m counseling. If you’re going in without a recruiter, especially if you have a chance to meet with HR or you’re having a first-round interview, it’s understand the target compensation for this position. Where would it fit in appropriately? The CEO makes X dollars. The CFO makes X dollars. The general counsel, the CHRO, and the COO tend to make similar money. You’re not going to come in priced far above the other executives on the team. You would hope that if you do a good job negotiating. You’re not coming in under the other executives.

Otherwise, they’re saying, “Why are we hiring this lawyer?”

We have PortCos now where we’re looking for GCs. The base salary is $500,000. I have PortCos where the GCs’ salary is $350,000. Don’t think $350,000 is worse than $500,000. I have a PortCo now where they’re hoping for a transaction in 2 to 3 years, where the equity could be worth several million dollars. You have to look at the whole package of the exit strategy in the end game.

How The Changing GC Role Impact Compensation

It’s a long-term bet. Back on the topic of looking at the peers and reverting to our jumping off point. You were saying that GCs are more of a business partner and a leader, co-equal to the other C-suite executives. Your survey also shows, and I’ve had this experience, that GCs are grabbing other functions. The CEO sees that the GC is a smart person in the room, is competent, and gets stuff done, so they add on all kinds of different functions. How does that play into the comp situation?

There’s no great answer for that. When you’re in that role and you’re grabbing these additional responsibilities, there could be a slight increase. All of a sudden, the general counsel is doing the role of the general counsel and the chief human resource officer. I’m hearing that a lot lately. I don’t know how they do it personally, but they do it. They might see a small increase, a 10% increase, or something along those lines, but you’re saying, “My base is $400,000. The CHRO base is $375,000. Look how much money they’re saving by doing this.” I’m not seeing GCs using that logic. I’m not seeing companies use that logic. I think the GCs are attracted to the opportunity to gain more responsibility and become more influential in the company. It’s not about the money. It’s more about the role that they’re playing.

If you have visions of getting some crazy increase in pay, it is highly unlikely to happen. Focus on getting a competitive offer instead. Share on X

That’s the attractiveness, but there could be a slight increase. I say “could be” because sometimes, I hear these GCs take on government relations, communications, CHRO, risk of compliance, and so many different things. I’m not seeing material elevation in the comp, and all of a sudden, you’re making double the pay. It usually goes up a small percentage, but it’s not a significant amount. What I do see is maybe some equity awards that come in where the CEO recognizes different things. All of a sudden, here’s an extra couple hundred thousand dollars in equity that you weren’t expecting.

I have a couple of follow-ups to that. To your point about what the CEO is looking for, for those candidates that have that experience with other functions or are interested in other functions, is that seen as a value-add?

It can be. The reason I say that is because if you’re going in and interviewing for the general counsel position, it’s annoying for them to hear that you’re interested in other positions. If they have aspirations like “We are looking for someone who can earn that trust and take on other roles,” it could be a benefit. It needs to be that you’ve proven that you’re capable of earning the trust and taking on this other responsibility, but if you’re in an interview, don’t fall into the trap of saying, “I’m looking for a role that evolves into other things.” First and foremost, they want to know you enjoy and love running the law department, and not just coming in to step into something else.

Baseline Of The Market

Stick the landing. Don’t look to the next strip. I want to go back to the survey. I don’t know if it can be made available through our show or if there’s a link that we can give people to download.

Anyone can come to our website and download the survey.

You’ve thrown around some general numbers. I’m wondering about the comparison, and the survey talks about this. Everyone knows what those folks in public companies make because their comp is on their SEC filings. Law360 does an article every day about so-and-so’s comp that went up or down. How can people get a good sense of the market for private companies, PE PortCos, or whatever?

The surveys will give you a good baseline for the market, but in my opinion, one problem I have with these surveys is that they blend. There’s the tier-one lawyer, the top law school, the top law firm, in-house. They have that high EQ and the high business intelligence, and they can get mixed in with lawyers that maybe don’t check all of those boxes because they have a similar title.

It’s as good as garbage in, garbage out. It’s as good as the input.

It’s a good way to look at trends in the industry, but you are going to need to understand where you fit into the company. There’s pay equality in these companies, and then there’s pay inequality where someone hits the ball out of the park, and all of a sudden, I see a ten-year lawyer moving up the ranks and in a position that you never would expect for someone at their age. There are these people who stand out. The baseline comp for in-house counsel at a good company is at $200,000 to $300,000 base, maybe $350,000 base at a bigger company. There are 25% to 50% cash bonuses. Fifty percent is probably a little bit high. There is a 20% to 40% annual equity award. That’s not for the general counsel. That’s just for a midline.

If you’re a general counsel of an $800-million public company, you’re typically making $1 million a year in total comp. If it’s a $5 billion-plus, the average is about $5.5 million or over $5 million. There are standouts to that list. We see the highest-paid GCs making $25 million at some major corporations. The bulk of that is in equity. If you’re going to a public company, you have to look at whether the base salary is going to be competitive with your peers. You’re going to get a cash bonus, but I think you also need to be long-term minded.

You cannot work on your IQ, but you can play with your EQ to make it better. Share on X

I’ll give you an example of the oil and gas industry. The oil and gas industry gives you an X percentage of your base salary in equity every year. Sometimes, oil is up. Sometimes, oil is down. When oil is down, all of a sudden, the equity is worth a little bit. You get a lot more of it. When oil is up, you’re going to get the same amount of percentage. Twenty-five percent of $300,000 is X dollars. You’re going to get less of it. Those down times are good times because then you’re getting a lot more of it, especially if you’re long-term focused. If you’re short-term focused, it could be a problem.

How The Equity Payout Works

Earlier on, you mentioned the exits for PE companies. I think people need to have in mind that this isn’t just a tomorrow payday. When you’re looking at that package, and to your point about drilling down and getting a sense of the company objectives, understand, “When does my equity vest?” You shared some insights about how the equity waterfall works if there is an exit. Maybe we can talk a little more tactically about how equity payouts go.

There are two things. There’s time-based vesting, where companies might have a five-year vest on the equity. It can either be the waterfall, like you’re talking about cliff vesting, where it only vests at year five, or it can be a gradual vesting, say 20% a year for five years. How they’re going to lock you in is different in different situations. What people are looking for is when a transaction happens, the vesting schedule accelerates, and all of a sudden, you’re receiving $3 million to $5 million based on the transaction in years 3, 4, or 5. That’s pretty good stuff. By the way, because there’s a transaction, it doesn’t mean you’re leaving the company.

Maintaining Good Relationship With Clients

What happens is that the transaction occurs, and you get a payout. A lot of people push that payout forward where it gets reinvested, so they don’t take all the money out. They stay with the company and get another tranche of equity. I have had people go through 2 to 3 transactions with the same company. They either roll it forward or take some out, buy a nice house, buy a nice car, keep the rest in, and work with that team on a collaborative basis. “Let’s do it again. We can do it again.”

You get on the right roll with the right people. You have to be so careful when you’re evaluating these companies. First of all, they’re all going to tell you how great they are. Do you enjoy the product? Do you believe in the mission? Are the people the kind of people that you could go elbow to elbow with for maybe fifteen hours a day to achieve these goals? These people’s work is not a 9:00 to 5:00 job. They’re working hard, and they’re trying to get there quickly. You have to be careful.

I’ve seen it over and over where people have done so well. After a transaction, their equity is accelerated. They get the value. Here are several million dollars. You decide, “Do I want to stick here and do it again with these people?” Now, you’re on a high spot. Now, you’re an attractive candidate because you can go on the market and say, “Listen to what I did. I took the revenue. It was $500 million, and we brought it up to $1.5 billion. We increased EBITDA. We did a 3, 4, or 5X transaction.”

All of a sudden, the CEOs hear you and they go, “This person is a winner. I want her.” You have to be careful. Many people, unfortunately, aren’t so lucky. There’s risk. You take a position, and it doesn’t work out. Maybe it is the leadership team, the CEO who hired you leaves shortly after, the company loses its focus, the industry takes a beating, or something. It can happen. I don’t want to sell it like it’s all gravy.

Preparing For Job Interviews And Salary Negotiations

We talked a little bit about negotiation tactics and the GC candidates walking a line and not being too forward. I wonder if you could share a little bit of advice on how candidates can best prepare for salary negotiations.

If the GC is not an NEO, and you don’t know what the GC is making, do your research. Understand what the other NEOs are making. Have some sense of what their bonuses have been, not just for that year, but go back in the proxies from previous years. They’re all available. Here’s what the base was. Here’s what the bonus was. Here’s what the equity payout has been. You’re not an NEO, but you have a sense of where you fit in with the others on the executive team.

I don’t like people putting numbers out first. We’re not allowed to ask how much people are making. “How much are you making today?” That’s an illegal interview question. Do you want to know what every human resource head who was involved with making this law asked me first? “How much are they making now?” They’re all asking me. I thought that was an illegal interview question.

They ask, “What are your salary expectations?” How do you answer that question?

Most people are candid, letting them know where you stand. I encourage that because people like that transparency.

If you put that out there, I feel like there are two risks. One, it’s short selling, but two, it could price you out. They could say, “I’m not going to bring her to phase two because we can’t afford her.” How do you walk that line?

By the way, this is my answer when someone says, “What are you looking for?” “I’m looking to be paid competitively with the others in these types of positions in your organization. If you make me the most competitive offer you can, I’m sure I’m going to be excited to accept it.” Use that phrase, competitive offer. “I’m looking to be paid competitively with the others in my position.” The GC can certainly say that, but I think it’s harder for the mid-levels to come in and throw their weight around.

For the general counsel, it is understanding where people are coming from on the executive leadership team. If you are a true general counsel candidate, you’re doing your research. If it’s a private company, and you don’t know, it is understanding where others are in that organization. What is your target for the members of the executive team? If you’re lower level or mid-level, “I’m looking to be paid the most competitive offer you can make. I want to be paid competitively with my peers in the organization.” Having that attitude of, “I’m more interested in the opportunity than the money,” the money will follow. They know they’re not going to be able to shortchange and keep you there.

By the way, if you have visions of grandeur where you’re looking for some crazy increase in pay, it’s highly unlikely that’s going to happen. If you use a competitive offer, you’ll typically be offered a good offer. At the same time, I have people who say, “I’m making $800,000. I’m looking for a $1.5 million.” You have to appreciate how this company is paying others. If you go in and do a great job, it’s going to be recognized, and you’re going to get there.

It strikes me, too, that there’s a timing element to this money conversation. I feel like some of the recruiting firms will ask, “What are your salary expectations?” They ask that early on. It can feel like a little bit of a trap.

I don’t believe the recruiting firms are trying to trap anyone. We want to get a sense of, “Are you going to be reasonable to close on an opportunity?” The worst thing we could do as recruiters is bring someone to the table who we could never close because they have unrealistic expectations. That’s annoying for everyone. We get dinged as the recruiter. “Why did you bring me this person?” It makes us look bad.

Here’s my favorite thing. You’re right. I don’t say, “How much are you making?” I say, “What will it take to get you to the finish line to get you to accept an offer?” This is music to my ears. “Let me tell you what I’m making now, and you tell me how that falls into line with here.” I’ll play that out. Sometimes, you have a situation, and I had this recently on a placement, where I had a candidate. Their comp was different. Their comp was lower base and higher cash. My client was paying a higher cash base and a lower bonus. We’re never going to mislead anyone. At the same time, “Here’s where they’re coming from, from a cash compensation. This is what we’re looking for for total comp and position, and so it aligns right.”

You will get beaten down and rejected in the recruitment process. You will not always get what you want but you have to keep trying. Share on X

I like it at the base. I like to know. I like some certainty that I’m going to get. I’m the sole earner in my family. My kids like to eat. One of them goes to private school. I need to have some cash. I like to get the bonus or long-term incentive, but the Bratchers have certain needs.

If you have a number that you need to support your family, put it out there.

I’ll say for myself. For the right opportunity, you might be more flexible with something that’s more fun or has a possibility for more growth. You love the team. You don’t want to foreclose the opportunity. You need to have certain guardrails about the positions you’re interested in. For me, anyway, I don’t want to close doors too tightly if it’s something that might be interesting.

Here’s the worst scenario. The worst scenario is when people go, “I know they say they’re only going to pay $300,000 for this position, but I’m so darn good. I guarantee they’re going to see me and pay me double.” That’s not happening.

Especially when they don’t know you. You can have all the things, prestigious law school, or whatever, but at some point, we’re all just lawyers.

One question you haven’t asked me is, “What makes you the most attractive candidate?” It is more than law school, more than a law firm, or anything. We’ve narrowed it down to that EQ. EQ is so important. The good news for everyone is you can’t work your IQ. You can’t work on your personality. It is what it is by this age, but you can play with your EQ. You can make it better. Read the five characteristics of people with high EQ, and you’ll see why they make great business-minded lawyers.

One, they’re great listeners. Two, they’re great relationship builders. I talk to people, and they tell me, “I just stay in touch.” I had a person many years ago who worked for another company. He’s like, “I’m going to meet the CEO for lunch next week because we stay in good touch. We are in close contact.” I’m like, “That’s amazing.” Who do you stay in touch with? People that you respect and like. They are a good listener, a good relationship builder, and calm and cool under pressure. No one wants someone who is going to get nervous.

I had an interview for a GC. They didn’t like it. They said, “It seems like he gets nervous. He was very nervous during the interview.” You don’t want to be nervous. No one wants that. Be calm and cool under pressure. The next critically important point is number four. They’re humble. They don’t mind rolling up their sleeves and doing the work. Some people just want to manage others and not roll up their sleeves and do work. They want humble people. The person who knows everything and always knows the answer, typically, you hate that person. Number five, you said it. They’re optimistic. If something comes in from a litigation standpoint or a problem with negotiations, and you say, “Don’t worry. I’ve got this,” that’s music to the CEO’s ears.

If you look at that, that’s someone who has high EQ. You have those five points. You go in. You come across as humble. You listen well. A good interview is a 50-50 interview. You’re talking half the time. They’re talking half the time. If you’re talking 70% of the time, you’re talking too much. The person who calls me following, “That was the best interview I’ve ever had in my entire life.” Typically, when they tell me that, you know what I think? “They didn’t stop talking.” The client calls me on the other line and goes, “That was the worst interview we ever had.” Vice versa. How about if you’re on an interview, and the interviewer doesn’t want to stop talking? They want to keep selling the opportunity.

Can I ask you about that? I am unsure how to navigate those kinds of conversations.

You have to somehow interrupt because the problem is that if you just sit there listening the whole time, you don’t get a chance to sell yourself. There are a number of times I hear from a candidate, “I couldn’t interrupt. He kept talking and talking.”

It feels rude.

It feels rude, but you’re not being able to show them what you’re made of. You need to get to mix in. “Let me ask you a question. Where do I need to come in and hit the ground running? What is most valuable that I need to come in and do today?”I call it getting the answers to the test before you take it. The person says how great they are in one area, and it’s not important to the company. They’re like, “That’s great. You can do that, but we don’t care.” It is about asking that question and being able to respond with, “Here’s what I can do for you.”

Your suggestion is to edge your way in. It feels tough, especially in an interview conversation. You’re trying to show good manners and like, “I’m not a jerk,” but it’s jerky behavior on the interviewer’s part if they’re like giving their monologue.

You know what it’s doing? It’s showing you very low EQ, but here’s good news for everyone. Most CEOs have poor EQ. It’s their way or the highway. They don’t want to hear shit about any problem that’s going on in your life. You will possibly deal with people with low EQ throughout the interview process. You’re going to have to edge your way in.

John’s Pump-up Song

John, this was so fun. I’m going to end with a fun last question. Before I got on, I listened to my pump-up song, Short Skirt / Long Jacket by Cake. My girls had that going for me, so I could get excited for this conversation. What is your pump-up song?

If you ask anyone in my family, they would 100% give the same answer. It is the Rolling Stones’ You Can’t Always Get What You Want. I love that song. It empowers me because in our business, you’re getting beaten down. Being a recruiter is about dealing with rejection. You don’t always get what you want, but you have to keep trying. It is the same thing with lawyers. It’s all about dealing with other people’s problems. You have to keep trying, and you’ll get there.

It’s just not going to be easy. Someone who’s trying to achieve the GC role goes on three interviews. It doesn’t work out. I have interviewed amazing GC candidates a number of times. They’re successful. They’re a public company. I have a person interviewing at a $5 billion company, and the CEO goes, “I’m not interested. They’re not right.” All of a sudden, two months later, a $20 billion public company announces its new GC hire. Who is it? The one that the $5 billion GC snubbed their nose at. You have to keep doing it. You have to keep trying, and you’ll get what you want.

You might get what you need. Great call. I love that. I’m going to listen to the Rolling Stones for that.

I’m going to have to pump it up on my ride home.

This has been so fun, John. Thanks for being here.

Thank you so much, Stacy.

Legal Department Compensation Revealed – John Gilmore, CEO Barker Gilmore (E69)