Hiring in Nature Tech: What Anthology Has Learned Placing Talent Across the Sector

17 Sept

Wanting to save the planet might get you interested in nature tech. It won't necessarily get you hired.

For Sam Clayton, Founder of Anthology, mission matters, but it isn't enough on its own. Sam points to the value of people bringing practical experience from other sectors, including an influx of people from finance who can bring critical thinking and an understanding of what the numbers are saying and where they're leading.

Anthology also sees the other side of the equation: founders getting so caught up in the detail of a job description that they lose sight of what they actually need someone to deliver. And when salaries can't always compete with the wider market, companies have to think carefully about what else makes people want to stay.

For this Member Spotlight: Ask the Nature Tech Expert interview, we asked Sam what they've learned from years of working in recruitment across nature tech, regenerative agriculture and natural capital. From breaking into the sector and writing better job descriptions to hiring across borders and knowing when someone is ready for their next move, here's their advice.

About Anthology

Q. Anthology focuses specifically on recruitment in nature tech, regenerative agriculture, and natural capital. What do you see from that seat that a generalist recruiter would miss?

We understand that these are still emerging and nascent areas and this poses risks for potential candidates. It’s important that, as well as the excitement and incredible opportunity, potential candidates understand there will be tough challenges involved. It’s not for everyone. A generalist recruiter may miss this nuance, resulting in a tendency to ‘oversell’ an opportunity, and adoption of an overly simplistic “come save the world - what’s not to like!” approach.

Understanding the sector allows us to provide a fuller picture of the opportunity at hand when engaging with candidates, warts and all. If we put somebody forward for a role, we’ve ensured that they truly understand the pros and cons of the opportunity and are comfortable with all elements of it, and, ultimately, will therefore have a strong chance of actually being a success in post.

Q. How has hiring in this space shifted over the last few years?

It’s stating the obvious but AI has sparked the biggest change. We’re already starting to see that, as more repetitive and churn-based tasks become automated, hiring businesses value those who can operate at a good level across more than once function / discipline.

Personally, I don’t believe that being a specialist in something is dead.. you can have a core specialism, but versatility and being able to wear a few different hats is becoming increasingly useful.

Another knock-on effect of this is that when businesses, especially smaller businesses, do hire, it tends to be of a more critical and high-stakes nature. If somebody is going to come in and spin multiple plates, then the importance of getting the hire right increases. From our part, we’re continually trying to develop better ways to de-risk hiring for our clients and maximise the odds of them getting the right person first time.

For Anyone Trying to Break In

Q. What skills and backgrounds tend to do well in nature tech, and where do those people usually come from?

Pragmatism is important. The sector definitely needs its dreamers and blue sky thinkers, but often the value that people from ‘the outside’ bring to the table is hardened expertise in what has worked and what hasn’t in other sectors, be that related to product, commercial success, operational set-up, etc.

In terms of where they come from, there’s been an influx of people from finance coming into the sector. They’ll often have the critical thinking ability, and understanding of what the numbers are saying and where they’re leading, in order to help a business get from A to B.

Q. Someone wants to move into this space from a completely different industry. Where do they even start?

Simply applying for roles through the usual channels is largely ineffectual these days, especially if your CV isn’t obviously hitting every marker (including sector-specific experience). This is because there’s no real evidence that you’ve applied due to a genuine interest in the sector. Put yourself in the shoes of the hiring manager / CV reviewer, in the current day and age of ‘easy-apply’ and the hoards of irrelevance that comes through to any job advert, how do they know you haven’t just hit apply for 100 different roles across numerous sectors? So there’s no real hook to lure them into giving you a chance.

That doesn’t mean all hope is lost. You’ll find that these sectors are still relatively small worlds and, especially with the help of AI, it’s easier than ever to work out who the players are in your target area and to curate a list of these. Set about connecting with their leaders directly regardless of if they seem to actively hiring or not, and getting your name known to them. It takes a bit of groundwork and, at first, may yield a low response rate, so it takes some perseverance. Treat it as a project that should deliver results over time, rather than overnight.

Q. What do you see people get wrong when they're trying to break in?

Sometimes focusing too hard on the idealistic side of things such as wanting to save the world. Don’t get me wrong, this is a great motivation to have and is a great reason for wanting to get into the sector; but it can’t be the only thing you’re bringing to the table.

If you can combine the above with an actual appreciation of the commercial side of things, for example, what is the ultimate purpose of the product / solution / service, what is the data being collected for, how could it become commercially successful, then you’ll stand a much stronger chance.

Q. As a candidate, what red flags should you watch for when evaluating a nature tech employer?

I’ll avoid specifying ‘red flags’, nowhere is perfect, every business has it’s own challenges and I don’t want to suggest that one particular red flag should prevent you from considering an opportunity. The whole picture has to be considered, pros and cons.

But in terms of something to look out for; it’s often said that a great team is a bigger predictor of success for a business than a great product. You’ll likely only be able to get a surface level idea at first, but check out the background of the business leaders. Where have they been before, what’s their track record? Or is it their first gig?

I’m not suggesting you use this to completely rule an opportunity in or out.. but, along with everything you learn along the way, it will help you to build a picture of the possible culture and likely strengths (and weaknesses), things you can then delve into deeper when it comes to an interviewing.

Last thing I’d say is don’t be too quick to rule out an opportunity with a start-up due to perceived job insecurity. I might be too cynical, but, even with established global corporates, job security isn’t what it used to be. A job for life is very rare these days.

For Founders and Hiring Managers

Q. Most nature tech founders have never hired before. Where do people go wrong when writing a job description?

This is something we work on a lot with our clients. I see so many examples of hiring businesses getting lost in the weeds of a job spec, that they start to lose sight of what the role fundamentally exists for, and therefore end up evaluating candidates against the wrong things, and arbitrary yardsticks. If you find yourself agonising over small, granular details in a job spec, you probably need to step back and take a more overarching view.

Keep your eyes on the prize. Work out what you really need for your business to get from A to B. Then, what skills and qualities will somebody need to get you there. Focus only on these. Everything else can be de-prioritized (or dropped). Note: we have a calculator tool on our website for picking apart diluted job requirements, see here: https://www.anthologyglobal.co/ambiguous-requirement-calculator

Before you even think about putting anything on paper, get the key decision makers in a room, and simply have a conversation about what you need. Record this conversation (or, if you’re the only decision maker, voice your thoughts and record them). You’ll find that you tend to focus on the important bits, not the granular details. Throw the transcript into your preferred LLM, and get it to create something for you, this gives you a basis from which to fill in the blanks and make alterations.

Q. When should an early stage team hire a generalist versus a specialist?

The answer to this alludes back to the points above. Work out what your business needs to succeed or reach it’s next goal, and therefore what a new hire will need to deliver. It then becomes fairly straightforward to define what success looks like in 6 / 12 / 24 months (be it “deliver x amount of revenue”, or “get our product to the point where it can do x, y and z”).

Then you can work out what you truly need from someone in order to succeed at this deliverable. When push comes to shove, will they actually need to be a specialist in one thing (or the area you operate in)? If the answer is yes then fair enough, target this. But if not, don’t be afraid to go for someone with a more generalist skillset, so long as they bring the right ethos and values to the table.

Also, consider this when hiring for a specialist; what happens once they’ve achieved what you brought them in for? If that’s 1-2 years down the line, they’ve got you from A to B but then they move on for their next challenge, are you happy with this outcome? Not every hire needs to be for the next 5-10 years, but for those where you do want greater longevity, again you might have to open your mind to those with multiple strings to their bow who can move across different functions.

Q. Cash is tight in this sector. How do you structure compensation and equity to retain good people when you can't compete on salary?

Honestly, you might not be able to. I’m not anti-equity by any stretch (it can be a great way of showing your staff that you’re in this together, and company success benefits everybody), but the hard reality is that for most people with bills and a mortgage to pay, equity is financially worthless until the day that it’s not. If you knowingly have somebody in your team who is underpaid compared to market rates, then you have to accept it’s a risk factor.

The best way to retain people in this situation is to create an environment that they don’t want to leave. Where they have flexibility (you’d be amazed at how the little things, like the ability to work their hours around the morning school run, can have a hugely positive effect), the culture is positive, they can express themselves, the work is rewarding, etc. Make it so that, even if somebody is waving more money in their face, it’s going to be a wrench for them to leave.

Ultimately though you can’t completely negate the risks involved in having high performing people on relatively low salaries, you’ll always be treading a tightrope.

(I’d caveat this by saying that it’s different when hiring at a ‘Co-Founder’ level. Those attracted to Co-Founder posts know the score, that it’s going to be equity loaded rather than salary, and they likely thrive on the risk and excitement of this. But trying the same approach with more general employees can backfire).

Q. Which roles are hardest to fill right now, and what makes them so difficult?

It depends on the nuances but generally speaking experienced level commercial hires can pose a challenge. They’re often less black and white and harder to define than technical roles, and getting somebody who genuinely understands the complexities of what you’re trying to sell (or who has the ability to pick it up quickly) can be difficult.

If you’re developing something new, your pool of people who have sold the same type of product or service is likely small or non-existent. So you have to think outside the box in terms of what could someone have sold that will give them transferable ability. Then there’s the question of how do you measure their performance; if it’s a service with a slow sales cycle where high volume sales aren’t expected from day one, then by the time you realise someone is underperforming you could be a year one. How do you keep an eye on this without falling into the trap of micro-managing?

For Those Already in the Space

Q. For someone already in nature tech who wants to move laterally or step up, what tells you they're ready?

Speaking from the perspective of start-ups and scale-ups, as that’s largely who we work with; I think when you realise that somebody is doing a job for you and you never have to worry about or question them… that’s often a sign that they’re ready for more. They’re at the stage where you know you can rely on them. This might happen gradually rather than overnight, but eventually you have a penny drop moment where you realise; “everything this person does, or is expected to do, just gets done reliably and well”.

Q. Nature tech is a global community. What does hiring across borders look like in practice, and what should teams know before they try it?

Don’t underestimate how different the employment climate, in terms of regulations, required benefits, etc., can be from one place to another. This is not a reason solely to not do it, but getting caught out by this, then having to be reactively put measures in place once you’re already 95% of the way into a hiring process, can be very stressful and cause delays at exactly the wrong time.

An example: I once placed somebody with a multi-national organization who said the person could be based anywhere in the world. The candidate they chose was in France. France has particularly stringent regulations and employee entitlements (such as pension levels) compared to many other places. While the hiring business assured me they could recruit anywhere and that they have people in most parts of the world, suddenly we had a delay on our hands post offer while their legal team worked it all out. It was all concluded successfully, but this was a business with ample legal & HR resources to throw at it, and it still caused a hiccup along the way.

The Bigger Picture

Q. What does the talent picture in nature tech tell you about where the sector is going?

The sector is growing but not at the pace that we would all like it to. It’s a complicated space to invest into as the returns aren’t normally immediate, which can sometimes lead to frustrating periods of feeling like things are flatlining. There are actually more people wanting to get into it than there are opportunities available at the moment.

On the plus side; this means that the sector should be relatively well serviced for talent for the foreseeable future, of course, challenges will still exist in terms of ensuring you get the right talent for your particular mission (just because someone knocks on the door, doesn’t mean they’re necessarily right for your needs).

Q. What do you wish more nature tech organisations understood about hiring?

Don’t apply blanket assumptions to all role types. Question everything. What I mean by this is that each role should be considered as unique and with it’s own nuances. For some, you might genuinely need somebody who is strongly mission driven (and likely shares your motivations, perhaps they genuinely want to save the planet for example and this is their main motivator) but is that actually imperative for all roles (some might require a more pragmatic operator, even if they don’t share all the same missions and motivations).

Or, there are some roles where you want longevity. The normal narrative that’s drilled into us is that you always want to hire for somebody who’ll be a long termer. Somebody who’s moved every couple of years = bad. Again, question if this is truly desirable for all role types. If someone comes in, achieves what they need to and gets you from A to B, but then gets itchy feet and moves after a couple of years, this could still represent success.

Don’t just swallow the usual norms and narratives, they may be valid for some appointments, but not others.

There are plenty of assumptions about what a “good” nature tech hire looks like: someone deeply embedded in the sector, highly mission-driven, and in it for the long haul. Sam's advice is to question those assumptions. What matters for one role may not matter for another, and a successful hire might be someone who brings experience from a completely different sector, gets a business from A to B, or simply has the skills to do what the role actually requires.

Thanks to Sam Clayton for sharing Anthology's perspective with the Nature Tech Collective community. Connect with Sam Clayton on LinkedIn and find out more about Anthology at anthologyglobal.co.

Megha Chadha