Direct answer: A reviewed client and candidate follow-up queue that preserves mandate context, confidentiality, ownership, and the next responsible action.
Who this workflow is for
Executive search firms, Search partners, Candidate and client teams. Use it when relationship context is spread across approved records, communication, meetings, and documents, but the final judgment still belongs to a person.
Execution mode and prerequisites
Confidential, reviewed operating recipe. Finta can assemble accessible records and prepare drafts, but search professionals own assessment, candidate representation, information sharing, conflicts, and communication.
- An active mandate with defined access rules
- Permissioned client and candidate relationship records
- Connected or logged communication evidence
- A documented confidentiality and conflict process
Inputs, review boundary, and outcome
| Input | What a person verifies | Reviewed output |
|---|---|---|
| Active mandate | Role, client, search team, and authorized scope | Search review boundary |
| Candidate and client records | Identity, consent, confidentiality, and relationship owner | Permissioned review set |
| Communication evidence | Latest interaction, promises, and approved next step | Source-linked follow-up queue |
Run the workflow
- Choose the active mandate and the client and candidate records allowed in the review.
- Reconcile the latest meeting, email, task, and documented commitment for each relationship.
- Separate client-facing, candidate-facing, and internal-only information.
- Check consent, confidentiality, conflicts, ownership, and any do-not-contact instruction.
- Prepare the next action or message as a draft with only the permitted context.
- Have the responsible search professional approve, revise, defer, or dismiss each item.
Human approval boundary
A search professional confirms the mandate, consent, confidentiality, conflict status, and intended recipient before any client or candidate information is shared or any message is sent.
Worked example
A candidate asks to keep a conversation confidential until after a board meeting, while the client requests a progress update. The reviewer records the candidate's restriction, shares only aggregate search progress with the client, and schedules the candidate follow-up for the agreed date. No candidate-specific detail is included without permission.
Expected review receipt
- The mandate and authorized audience are identified
- Consent, confidentiality, and conflict checks are recorded
- The supporting communication can be reopened
- The responsible search professional owns the approved next step
Decision checklist
- Every relationship is tied to the correct mandate
- Candidate consent and confidentiality are visible
- Internal assessment is not exposed to an unauthorized recipient
- Conflict and ownership checks are complete
- The next action reflects the latest verified interaction
Failure states and safe stops
- The candidate or mandate match is uncertain
- Consent to share information is missing
- A conflict or off-limits constraint is unresolved
- Internal assessment could be exposed to the wrong audience
Where Finta helps
In a supported, permissioned setup, Finta can organize the relevant CRM record, relationship history, connected or user-provided evidence, documents, and next-action workspace. Aurora can prepare a recommendation, summary, or draft. A person remains responsible for checking the evidence and approving consequential changes or communication.
Relevant Finta products: CRM, Aurora, Tasks, Documents. Relevant integrations: Gmail, Outlook, Google Calendar.
What this workflow does not do
- Finta does not assess candidate suitability or make hiring decisions.
- A relationship record does not establish consent to disclose candidate or client information.
- Firm policy and applicable employment and privacy requirements control the workflow.
Sources and review notes
AESC's professional standards emphasize integrity, objectivity, inclusion, and confidentiality in executive search. Those principles inform the review boundary on this page; they do not certify a firm's process or replace its policies.
Research reviewed: September 1, 2026. Recheck product behavior, permissions, professional standards, and the human approval boundary before publication and after any material workflow change.