Your Network Is Worth More Now, Not Less · Chris Berta, Laurel Group

What we talked about.

Chris Berta, a partner at Seattle based executive search firm Laurel Group, joins Sunny Ray to explain why strong professional networks matter more, not less, as AI reshapes hiring. Berta traces Laurel Group's path from early SaaS work through the cloud era to today's Gen AI wave, and explains how the firm partners with VC and private equity backed growth companies. Drawing on his own background as a product manager at Amazon, head of digital marketing at Washington Mutual, and an early hire at Aquantive, which was acquired by Microsoft for about 6.5 billion dollars, he describes how being recruited himself shaped his approach to treating candidates as long term relationships rather than transactions. He recounts lessons from his first search, for Expedia, and how AI generated resumes have flooded companies with lookalike applicants, making referrals more valuable than ever. Berta also shares what founders should never outsource, like co-founder hires, versus what they should always bring in outside help for, and predicts both more boutique search firms and continued consolidation among larger, private equity backed competitors over the next five years.

A Seattle executive search partner explains why real relationships beat AI generated resumes in today's job market.

The questions, and the answers.

Tell me about Laurel Group. What do you guys do and why should listeners care?

We're a boutique executive search firm named after Laurelhurst, a Seattle community, meaning we never rest on our laurels. We started in 2002 after the two founders left Heidrick and Struggles wanting to be more knowledgeable about clients and candidates. We began educating companies on SaaS, moved into cloud as Seattle became a cloud hub, and now we're focused on Gen AI, working closely with VC and private equity firms to staff their portfolio companies.

You've sat in operating roles yourself, in digital marketing, product, and other functions. How does having sat in those seats change how you recruit for them?

Having been in those functional roles, I gravitate toward go to market functions like chief product officer, chief marketing officer, and head of sales, because those are the people I worked closely with. That's where my network is strongest. If I do a good enough job on one search, clients often ask me to hire for other functions too, so we end up placing CFOs and CTOs as well.

Your own network recruited you out of a large bank back to a startup. What did being on the receiving end teach you about how a search really starts?

I had been at Aquantive, which was acquired by Microsoft for about 6.5 billion dollars, then Amazon, then Washington Mutual, where I got frustrated pushing for more investment in online. Friends Tom and Jeff recruited me, and I initially thought of recruiters as used car salespeople. What changed my mind was recognizing the difference between transactional recruiting and treating people as an investment in their future, not a transaction.

What was the first executive search you ran, and what did you get wrong?

That was Expedia, about 22 years ago. It took me longer than it should have because I was evaluating candidates through my own bias and my own thinking rather than my client's actual needs. I also wasn't engaged enough with the hiring manager directly, working mostly through an internal recruiter, so I learned to get a weekly cadence with hiring managers so nothing gets lost in translation.

AI has made applying for a role almost free. When did you first see that break a client's hiring process?

Around 2023 we started seeing a huge influx of resumes and cover letters, all customized by AI so everyone started looking the same. Companies would get 500,000 resumes generated by tools like Claude, screened by an applicant tracking system, essentially bots talking to bots before a human ever sees them. Good people were getting skipped over because they were just one of thousands of numbers.

Your view is that the network gets more valuable as AI gets better, not less. Why isn't that just a recruiter defending his job?

A friend at Amazon told me he posts jobs on the careers page but doesn't even look at those applicants, he gets referrals from his network instead and can ask the referee directly about the candidate. It has always been true that the majority of hires happen through someone you know or someone introducing you to someone new, not direct applications.

What's one hire a founder should never outsource to a search firm, and one they always should?

Hiring a co-founder is very difficult to outsource to a recruiting firm, we might make an introduction, but that relationship is so intimate you need to know the person yourself. On the other hand, any functional leadership role you need filled quickly, from a pool of passively looking candidates, is exactly where a search firm like us knows who's ready to make a move.

Five years out, are there more executive search firms or fewer, and which side are you building for?

I think there will be more companies doing recruiting, since AI tools let smaller teams have the same reach as larger firms. At the same time there's a lot of consolidation, with bigger, often private equity backed firms adding consulting and training services to grow their bottom line. We're staying streamlined and focused on our core expertise of knowing markets and experts deeply.