警惕“平庸回收型”高管:B2B+AI 招聘的红旗与对策
Beware the “Mediocre Recycled.” The Zombie Executives of B2B + AI.
给正在招 VP/C-level 的创始人和 HR 负责人:一份可直接照做的面试清单,含 6 个红旗信号和 6 条具体动作(如让现任最佳 VP 面试、追问 AI 实操、做真实背调),今天就能用在下一轮面试里。
So I wrote a version of this post a while back, and it struck a chord. A lot of founders reached out and said some version of “I just hired one of these.” Or worse, “I’ve hired three.”
所以,我之前写过一篇这样的文章,引起了很多人的共鸣。很多创始人联系我,说类似“我刚雇了一个这样的人”或者更糟,“我已经雇了三个了”这样的话。
But I’m updating it now because I’m watching this trend actually accelerate in the Age of AI. And it’s getting worse, not better.
但我现在更新这篇文章,是因为我看到这个趋势在人工智能时代正在加速。而且情况越来越糟,而不是越来越好。
Here’s what’s happening: The hottest B2B + AI startups are scaling fast. They need experienced leaders. CROs, CMOs, VPs of Product, Heads of Customer Success. And there’s a certain type of exec that keeps getting recycled into these roles. They worked at a good company once, maybe twice. They have the right logos on LinkedIn. They talk fluently about PLG and enterprise sales motions and AI-native go-to-market. They interview well.
现在的情况是:最热门的B2B + AI初创公司正在快速扩张。他们需要有经验的管理者。CRO、CMO、产品副总裁、客户成功负责人。有一种特定的高管类型不断被循环到这些职位上。他们曾经在一家好公司工作过,也许两次。他们在LinkedIn上有正确的公司标志。他们能流利地谈论PLG、企业销售模式和AI原生的市场推广。他们面试表现很好。
But they never actually did it. They just worked there.
但他们从未真正做过这些事。他们只是在那里工作过。
And now many of them can’t even use AI themselves.
而且现在他们中的许多人甚至自己都不会使用AI。
They’re joining AI-first companies and they haven’t built a single workflow with an AI agent. Haven’t used Claude or ChatGPT for anything beyond a casual query. Can’t demo the product they’re supposed to sell or market. They’re running the 2019 playbook at a 2026 company.
他们加入AI优先的公司,却从未用AI代理构建过任何工作流程。除了随意查询外,没有使用过Claude或ChatGPT。无法演示他们应该销售或营销的产品。他们在2026年的公司里运行着2019年的剧本。
The Mediocre Recycled were always a problem. But in AI, where the pace is 3-5x faster than traditional SaaS and the product changes weekly, they’re a disaster. They don’t just underperform. They actively slow you down. They hire the wrong people (also Mediocre Recycled, usually), burn 6-9 months figuring out they’re in over their head, and then trade that “VP at hot AI startup” line on their resume for another VP role somewhere else.
平庸的循环者一直是个问题。但在AI领域,节奏比传统SaaS快3-5倍,产品每周都在变化,他们就是灾难。他们不仅表现不佳,还会主动拖慢你的速度。他们招聘错误的人(通常也是平庸的循环者),浪费6-9个月才发现自己力不从心,然后利用简历上“热门AI初创公司副总裁”的头衔去别处再找另一个副总裁职位。
I was at one of the hottest B2B AI startups the other day and met one of the Mediocre Recycled as the new C-level exec. He was already lost. The pace was too fast, the product too complicated, his domain knowledge the wrong fit. But his fancy LinkedIn and ability to talk the talk got him a job at one of the hottest startups out there. He’ll last 9 months, tops. And then he’ll do it again somewhere else.
我前几天在一家最热门的B2B AI初创公司,遇到了一位平庸的循环者作为新的C级高管。他已经迷失了。节奏太快,产品太复杂,他的领域知识不合适。但他花哨的LinkedIn和能说会道的能力让他在最热门的初创公司之一得到了工作。他最多能撑9个月。然后他会去别处再重复一遍。
The Tells Haven’t Changed. But Add a Few New Ones.
迹象没有改变。但增加了一些新的。
The classic red flags still apply:
经典的危险信号仍然适用:
- No CEO-level reference. Any great VP-level candidate should have at least one CEO willing to sing their praises. Maybe not everywhere. Maybe a role or two didn’t work out. But someone to say they were great. If you can’t find a single former boss who says this person was magical, that’s not a yellow flag. It’s a red one.
- Too many short job hops as a VP/Director. We can debate if this is OK early in your career. But someone who never seems to make it a year as a VP probably won’t at your shop either.
- No one great wants to come with them. This is especially rough in a VP of Sales candidate, but it goes for any leader. A great leader should have 1-2 great folks that want to follow them. If they can’t name anyone who’d come with them, ask yourself why.
- Happy to join you from a direct competitor doing just about as well. Why would someone want to jump from one direct competitor to another, especially if the latter wasn’t growing far, far faster? That lateral move should make you pause.
- Doesn’t really do any homework during the interview process. Don’t gloss over this. Everyone glosses over this. The Mediocre Recycled are lazy. They’ll ask you tons of seemingly smart questions in the interview process. But they won’t really learn the product or do the type of deep research someone that’s truly engaged would and should do.
- 没有CEO级别的推荐人。任何优秀的副总裁级候选人都应该至少有一位CEO愿意为他们唱赞歌。也许不是每个地方都这样。也许有一两个职位不顺利。但总得有人说他们很棒。如果你找不到一个前老板说这个人很出色,那这不是黄旗,而是红旗。
- 作为VP/总监,跳槽过于频繁。我们可以争论这在职业生涯早期是否可行。但一个似乎从未在VP职位上待满一年的人,在你的公司很可能也不会。
- 没有优秀的人才愿意跟随他们。这在销售副总裁候选人中尤其棘手,但适用于任何领导者。一位优秀的领导者应该有一两个优秀的人才愿意追随。如果他们无法说出任何愿意跟随他们的人,问问自己为什么。
- 乐于从业绩差不多的直接竞争对手跳槽过来。为什么有人想从一个直接竞争对手跳到另一个,尤其是后者并没有增长得更快?这种横向跳槽应该让你警惕。
- 在面试过程中不真正做功课。不要忽视这一点。每个人都忽视这一点。平庸的“回收”型候选人是懒惰的。他们会在面试中问你大量看似聪明的问题。但他们不会真正了解产品,也不会做那种真正投入的人会做且应该做的深入研究。
But now add these for the AI era:
但现在为AI时代补充以下几点:
- They can’t actually use AI. Ask them. Not “do you believe in AI” or “what’s your AI strategy.” Ask them what AI tools they use daily. What have they built or shipped with AI? What workflows have they automated? If they fumble here, they will not be able to lead at an AI-native company. Period. A CRO who has never personally used an AI SDR or an AI-powered pipeline tool is going to run your revenue org like it’s 2021.
- They talk about AI in abstractions, never specifics. “We need to be AI-first” and “I’m very bullish on agents” are things anyone can say after reading three LinkedIn posts. Push them. What specific AI tool changed how they worked last quarter? What did they ship? What broke? If every answer is a platitude, you’ve got a Mediocre Recycled who added “AI” to their vocabulary but not their skillset.
- They want to hire a big team before doing anything. The best AI-era leaders are doing more with less. They want to. They’re using AI agents to handle what used to require 3-5 headcount. The Mediocre Recycled still want to hire 20+ people in their first 90 days because that’s the only way they know how to operate. If their first instinct is “I need a team of 8 before I can show results,” that’s a sign they can’t actually do the work themselves.
- 他们实际上不会使用AI。问问他们。不是问“你相信AI吗”或“你的AI战略是什么”。问他们日常使用哪些AI工具。他们用AI构建或交付了什么?他们自动化了哪些工作流程?如果他们在这里支支吾吾,他们将无法在AI原生的公司领导。就这么简单。一个从未亲自使用过AI SDR或AI驱动的管道工具的CRO,会像2021年那样运营你的营收组织。
- 他们抽象地谈论AI,从不具体。“我们需要AI优先”和“我非常看好智能体”是任何人读了三篇LinkedIn帖子后都能说的话。追问他们。上个季度哪个具体的AI工具改变了他们的工作方式?他们交付了什么?什么出了问题?如果每个答案都是陈词滥调,那你遇到的是一个平庸的“回收”型候选人,他们把“AI”加进了词汇表,但没有加入技能组合。
- 他们想在做事之前先招一个大团队。最好的AI时代领导者用更少的资源做更多的事。他们想要这样。他们用AI智能体来处理过去需要3-5个员工的工作。平庸的“回收”型候选人仍然想在头90天内招聘20多人,因为这是他们唯一知道如何运作的方式。如果他们的第一反应是“我需要一个8人的团队才能展示成果”,这表明他们实际上不能自己做这项工作。
What To Do About It
该怎么办
Strong folks do get fired all the time. Don’t let that be a flag, per se. But do let someone who never really gets anything done anywhere, despite lots of seemingly impressive roles, be a Big Red Flag.
能力强的人确实也经常被解雇。不要让这本身成为问题。但如果有人尽管拥有许多看似令人印象深刻的职位,却从未在任何地方真正完成过任何事情,那就要高度警惕了。
Here’s what I’d push every founder hiring a VP or C-level exec to do right now:
以下是我建议每位创始人现在招聘副总裁或高管时应立即采取的措施:
- Have the best VP currently in that role you know interview the candidate. Have the best CRO you know interview your potential VP of Sales. The best CMO, your VP of Marketing candidate. People stopped doing this for some reason a ways back, but you really should do it. Do the extra work here. Sometimes they may give even top candidates mixed feedback. But at least you’ll have that feedback. At least it will challenge you to see if you have a Mediocre Recycled zombie on your hands, or not.
- Push them hard on what they actually accomplished. Get numbers and metrics, and push on them. This isn’t a perfect test, but if you get loose or deflective answers, it’s often a sign. In the AI era, also ask: what did you personally automate, build, or ship with AI? Not your team. You.
- Do real reference checks and find at least one CEO or boss that says they are truly great. One is enough to take some risk. Zero is an issue. Reference checks are not a waste of time. You’re looking for someone like you, another CEO, another founder, that says they were magical. That’s not a waste of your time, or a “check the box” activity.
- Ask them who they’d bring with them, and talk to at least one of those folks. Don’t just assume because they say they know a few good folks that will come, that it’s true. If they can’t come up with any names, that’s a flag for a VP role. Go talk to one or two.
- Ask to talk to 1-2 of their customers. This is a great way to learn what a VP of Sales, Marketing, Product, or Customer Success really did well. Yes, it is OK to ask for this.
- Give them a real AI-native work test and/or have them deeply share with you how AI has changed their role. Not a case study from a textbook. Give them a real problem your company faces right now and ask them to use AI tools to work through it. You’ll learn more in 2 hours than in 5 rounds of interviews.
- 让你认识的最优秀的现任副总裁面试候选人。让你认识的最优秀的首席营收官面试你的销售副总裁候选人。最优秀的首席营销官面试你的市场营销副总裁候选人。不知何故,人们不再这样做了,但你确实应该这样做。在这方面多下功夫。有时他们甚至可能对顶尖候选人给出褒贬不一的反馈。但至少你会得到这些反馈。至少这会促使你思考,你面对的是否是一个平庸的“回收”型人才。
- 深入追问他们实际取得的成就。获取数字和指标,并深入追问。这不是完美的测试,但如果得到含糊或回避的回答,往往就是信号。在人工智能时代,还要问:你个人用AI自动化、构建或交付了什么?不是你的团队,而是你自己。
- 进行真正的背景调查,至少找到一位CEO或老板说他们确实非常出色。有一位这样的评价就足以承担一些风险。零位则是个问题。背景调查不是浪费时间。你要寻找的是像你一样的另一位CEO或创始人,说他们表现非凡。这不是浪费时间,也不是“走过场”的活动。
- 询问他们会带谁来,并与其中至少一人交谈。不要仅仅因为他们说认识一些优秀的人会来就信以为真。如果他们提不出任何名字,对于副总裁职位来说就是一个警示信号。去和其中一两个人谈谈。
- 要求与他们的1-2位客户交谈。这是了解销售、市场营销、产品或客户成功副总裁真正擅长什么的好方法。是的,提出这个要求是可以的。
- 给他们一个真正的AI原生工作测试,或者让他们深入分享AI如何改变了他们的角色。不是教科书式的案例研究。给他们一个你公司当前面临的真实问题,让他们使用AI工具来解决。你在2小时内学到的会比5轮面试更多。
The Real Risk Right Now
当前真正的风险
We all get blinded by logos, and we all get a bit tired after looking for a key VP role for months. But don’t make the mistake so many of us do, often again and again. And hire the Mediocre Recycled. The ones that somewhat desperate CEOs keep hiring again, and again, and again.
我们都会被光鲜的头衔蒙蔽,而且在寻找关键副总裁职位数月后都会感到疲惫。但不要犯我们许多人经常犯的错误,一次又一次地雇佣平庸的“回收”型人才。那些有些绝望的CEO们一次又一次地雇佣他们。
The risk is higher now than it’s ever been. AI-first companies are moving at a pace where a mediocre exec doesn’t just waste a quarter. They waste a year of compounding. While your competitor with a great CRO is shipping AI-powered outbound and closing deals with half the team, your Mediocre Recycled CRO is still building a “strategic hiring plan” and asking for a bigger budget.
现在的风险比以往任何时候都高。以AI为先的公司发展速度之快,使得一个平庸的高管不仅浪费一个季度,而是浪费一年的复利增长。当你的竞争对手凭借出色的CRO推出AI驱动的外呼,并用一半的团队完成交易时,你那个平庸的、循环利用的CRO还在制定“战略性招聘计划”,并申请更大的预算。
Take risk in your VP hires, but don’t settle. That’s different. That risk should usually be a stretch hire of some sort. Even at scale. And whatever you do, don’t settle for someone who worked at the right place but never actually got anything done. Who never moved the needle themselves. Who can’t even use the core technology your company is built on.
在招聘VP时承担风险,但不要将就。这是两回事。这种风险通常应该是某种形式的“跳高式”招聘,即使在规模化阶段也是如此。而且无论你做什么,都不要将就于那些在合适的地方工作过但从未真正做成过事的人,那些从未亲自推动过变革的人,那些甚至不会使用你公司所依赖的核心技术的人。
更进一步:量化金融体系
看懂新闻只是起点——沿量化金融路径,把它变成能交付的工程能力