Hiring someone who will report to two managers creates a challenge that traditional recruitment processes often overlook: the candidate must work effectively with two different people, not just one.
Both managers may be highly capable. The candidate may have excellent qualifications and relevant experience. Yet none of those strengths guarantees that the three individuals will work well together.
The critical question is not simply whether the candidate is right for the job. It is whether the candidate is a good interpersonal fit with each manager.
That distinction matters because interpersonal compatibility is specific to the people involved. Someone who works exceptionally well with one manager may experience considerable friction with another, even when both managers are competent and well-intentioned.
For CEOs, founders and senior leaders hiring into dual-reporting structures, this creates a risk that interviews, references and technical evaluations cannot adequately address.
The solution is to measure Interpersonal Alignment between the individuals involved rather than assuming compatibility based on favorable impressions.
Why Hiring for Two Managers Is Different
Dual-reporting roles are common in matrix organizations, cross-functional teams and growing businesses.
A product manager might report to both the Head of Product and the Head of Operations. A finance business partner might answer to a regional business leader and a central finance executive.
These arrangements can bring valuable expertise and coordination to a role. But they also create multiple working relationships that directly affect the employee’s experience.
Consider a candidate who values independence, prefers direct communication and is comfortable making decisions without frequent consultation.
One prospective manager may have a working style that complements those preferences. The other may prefer close collaboration, detailed discussions and regular involvement in decisions.
Neither manager is wrong. Neither approach is inherently better.
However, the candidate’s interpersonal compatibility with each manager may be very different.
This is precisely why hiring for dual-reporting roles requires a more sophisticated assessment of fit.
A candidate’s compatibility with one manager tells you nothing conclusive about their compatibility with the other.
And no amount of technical excellence eliminates the importance of those relationships.
The Three Relationships That Matter in Dual-Reporting Roles
When hiring someone who will report to two managers, leaders should consider three distinct interpersonal relationships.
1. The Candidate and Manager A
The first relationship is usually the one most closely examined during the hiring process.
Manager A interviews the candidate, evaluates their experience and considers whether they will work well together.
But there is an important difference between liking a candidate and being interpersonally compatible with them.
A candidate may communicate confidently, demonstrate sound judgment and build excellent rapport during an interview. Those qualities can create a favorable impression without establishing how well the two individuals will work together.
Interpersonal Alignment is not a measure of how impressive someone appears.
It concerns the fit between two particular people.
A structured, unbiased assessment methodology provides a more consistent basis for understanding that compatibility than personal impressions alone.
For a hiring decision, the objective is to establish how well the candidate’s individual characteristics align with those of Manager A.
2. The Candidate and Manager B
The second relationship requires its own independent assessment.
This is where organizations can make a costly assumption.
If Manager A strongly supports the candidate and Manager B also likes them during interviews, it is tempting to conclude that the candidate will work equally well with both.
But interpersonal compatibility does not work that way.
Two people may each be individually effective, successful and respected while being poorly suited to working closely together.
Equally, someone who experiences friction with one manager may work exceptionally well with another.
There are no universally perfect employees or universally perfect managers. There are better and worse interpersonal matches between particular individuals.
That is why the candidate’s Interpersonal Alignment with Manager B needs to be measured separately.
OpenElevator’s assessment methodology allows leaders to evaluate interpersonal compatibility through relationship-specific scores rather than relying on the assumption that one positive working relationship predicts another.
For a dual-reporting hire, the result is a clearer picture of how the candidate fits with each prospective manager.
3. The Relationship Between Manager A and Manager B
The third relationship is frequently overlooked because neither manager is the person being recruited.
Yet the relationship between the two managers also matters.
The managers need to coordinate priorities, resolve disagreements and establish how decisions affecting the employee will be made.
Their professional responsibilities may differ, and their working preferences may differ too.
That does not mean one manager needs to change their personality or adopt the other’s approach.
It means the organization needs to understand how the two people work together.
Where appropriate, their Interpersonal Alignment can also be assessed as a distinct relationship.
Alongside that assessment, leaders should establish clear accountability for decisions, deadlines and performance evaluations.
Interpersonal compatibility and operational clarity address different questions. Both matter.
The employee should not be left to resolve structural disagreements that belong with the two managers.
Why Interviews Cannot Reliably Measure Interpersonal Compatibility
Most hiring processes devote substantial attention to assessing candidates’ professional suitability.
Organizations review qualifications, interview candidates, check references and evaluate technical skills.
These activities serve a legitimate purpose.
They help establish whether someone has the knowledge, experience and capability to perform the role.
But they do not objectively measure how compatible that person will be with a particular manager.
Consider two candidates interviewing for the same dual-reporting position.
Candidate A is confident, articulate and builds immediate rapport with both interviewers.
Candidate B is equally qualified but communicates differently and creates a less immediate personal connection.
Without objective compatibility information, interviewers may favor Candidate A simply because the interaction felt more natural.
Yet this does not establish whether Candidate A will be the better interpersonal match with either manager.
Nor does it establish whether Candidate B might actually be more compatible.
Interview chemistry is not an Interpersonal Alignment score.
Structured interviews can make the evaluation of professional competence more consistent. They cannot replace an assessment designed to measure interpersonal fit between specific people.
The distinction is important because a leader’s intuition, however well developed, remains a subjective judgment.
Hiring decisions improve when different questions are answered by the methods designed to answer them.
Use interviews to evaluate capability.
Use Interpersonal Alignment assessments to measure compatibility.
How to Assess Interpersonal Fit Before Hiring
A more effective process separates the assessment of professional competence from the measurement of interpersonal compatibility.
Step 1: Define the Role and Reporting Responsibilities
Before considering candidates, both managers should agree on what the position requires.
Establish:
-
The responsibilities and expected outcomes of the role.
-
Which manager has authority over specific decisions.
-
How conflicting priorities will be resolved.
-
Who will conduct formal performance reviews.
-
How the employee and managers will coordinate their work.
This operational clarity is necessary regardless of which candidate is selected.
It also prevents the organization from confusing an unclear reporting structure with a problem of interpersonal fit.
Step 2: Assess the Candidate’s Professional Competence
Use interviews, relevant experience, work samples and technical evaluations to establish whether the candidate can perform the job.
In a dual-reporting role, it can be helpful to explore the candidate’s experience working with multiple stakeholders.
For example, interviewers might ask how the candidate has previously coordinated competing project requirements or managed responsibilities involving different senior leaders.
These questions assess professional experience and judgment.
They should not be treated as substitutes for measuring Interpersonal Alignment.
A convincing answer about managing competing priorities does not establish how compatible the candidate will be with either prospective manager.
Step 3: Measure Interpersonal Alignment With Each Manager
This is the critical additional step.
Rather than asking both managers whether they believe they would work well with the candidate, use OpenElevator’s assessment methodology to measure the interpersonal compatibility of each pairing.
For example:
| Relationship | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Candidate ↔ Manager A | Interpersonal Alignment score for this pairing |
| Candidate ↔ Manager B | Interpersonal Alignment score for this pairing |
| Manager A ↔ Manager B | Interpersonal Alignment score for this pairing, where relevant |
Each score relates to a specific relationship.
The scores should not be interpreted as universal ratings of the people involved.
A lower compatibility score does not mean a candidate lacks professional capability. Nor does it mean that either manager is ineffective.
It indicates that a particular pairing may have less natural interpersonal alignment.
That is valuable information because it identifies the relationship requiring attention rather than assigning blame to an individual.
Step 4: Evaluate the Results Alongside Professional Suitability
Once the assessment results are available, decision-makers can consider interpersonal compatibility alongside the candidate’s professional qualifications.
Imagine two candidates with similarly strong technical backgrounds.
The first has stronger Interpersonal Alignment with Manager A but weaker alignment with Manager B.
The second has more balanced compatibility across both reporting relationships.
This does not automatically mean the second candidate should be hired.
The organization must consider the relative importance of each relationship, the role’s responsibilities and the overall assessment results.
However, leadership now has information that interviews alone could not provide.
Rather than making an assumption about who will fit best, the hiring team can make a more informed decision.
An Interpersonal Alignment score is not a guarantee of future performance or retention. It is an additional, relationship-specific measure that improves the information available for decision-making.
What About Values Alignment?
Interpersonal Alignment is one important dimension of fit, but it is not the only one.
Another is Values Alignment.
At OpenElevator, Values Alignment does not mean whether an employee agrees with the organization’s mission, corporate values or strategic priorities.
It means how well the working environment provides what matters to the individual.
People differ in what they need and value at work.
These priorities can relate to four fundamental areas:
-
Safety and Certainty: The individual’s need for stability, fairness, clarity and security.
-
Contribution and Purpose: The importance of making a meaningful contribution.
-
Growth and Significance: The importance of development, progress and feeling valued.
-
Connection and Belonging: The importance of relationships, inclusion and interpersonal connection.
The relative importance of these needs varies from person to person.
A working environment that suits one employee extremely well may be less aligned with the priorities of another.
In a dual-reporting role, the reporting structure can affect that experience.
For example, an individual who places high importance on clarity and certainty may need well-defined decision rights across both managers.
Someone who values independence may place greater importance on having room to make decisions without unnecessary consultation.
The question is not whether either person has the correct priorities.
The question is how well the working environment meets the priorities of that particular individual.
This is why Values Alignment and Interpersonal Alignment should be understood as distinct dimensions.
Interpersonal Alignment concerns the fit between people. Values Alignment concerns the fit between what a person values and what their working environment provides.
Both offer information that a traditional hiring process may overlook.
Why Strong Performance Does Not Guarantee Strong Commitment
Even when the hiring decision is carefully considered, leaders need to understand how employees experience their working relationships over time.
A person may perform exceptionally well while experiencing a gap in Values Alignment or Interpersonal Alignment.
This matters particularly in dual-reporting roles because the employee has two important manager relationships.
Consider a hypothetical employee who consistently delivers high-quality work, meets deadlines and receives positive performance evaluations.
The employee’s professional performance is clear.
What those results do not establish is how committed the employee is to staying, whether the working environment meets their needs or how well they are aligned with each manager.
Those dimensions require direct assessment.
Likewise, changes in communication style, participation or initiative should not be treated as diagnostic evidence of resignation risk.
There are many possible explanations for how someone behaves at work.
Performance is observable. Commitment and alignment need to be measured rather than inferred from behavior.
This distinction is central to effective retention decisions.
If leaders rely only on visible performance, they may have incomplete information about the employee’s actual experience.
And if they rely on behavioral warning signs, they risk making decisions based on assumptions rather than evidence.
How to Use Interpersonal Alignment Results After Hiring
Interpersonal Alignment is not only relevant to candidate selection.
It is also valuable when assessing existing working relationships.
In a dual-reporting arrangement, an employee’s experience can change as responsibilities, team structures and circumstances evolve.
Measuring alignment provides leaders with a basis for understanding the relationships involved rather than assuming that everything is satisfactory because performance remains strong.
Suppose an assessment identifies stronger Interpersonal Alignment between an employee and Manager A than between the same employee and Manager B.
That result does not mean Manager B is a bad manager.
It means the second relationship has a different compatibility profile.
Leaders can use that information to consider how responsibilities, communication and working arrangements might be better structured.
In some cases, the response may involve clarifying expectations.
In others, it may involve adjusting the way the employee and manager collaborate.
The appropriate intervention depends on the assessment findings and the realities of the role.
The objective is not to eliminate every interpersonal difference.
It is to understand where fit is stronger or weaker so decisions can address the specific relationship involved.
This is fundamentally different from generic advice to improve management skills, communicate more often or strengthen team culture.
It starts with measured information about the individuals and relationships concerned.
The Business Case for Measuring Both Relationships
For business leaders, hiring decisions are ultimately about building a team capable of delivering results.
When an employee reports to two managers, a poor hiring decision can affect multiple functions.
There may be costs associated with replacement recruitment, onboarding, disrupted projects and the loss of valuable experience.
But hiring risk is not limited to selecting someone who lacks the required skills.
It also includes selecting a technically capable person without adequately understanding their fit with the individuals they will work with most closely.
Traditional hiring methods place considerable weight on qualifications, experience and interview performance.
Those remain important.
What is missing is an objective, relationship-specific assessment of interpersonal compatibility.
For a dual-reporting position, measuring alignment with both managers adds information directly relevant to the decision.
It helps leadership distinguish professional competence from interpersonal fit and consider how different pairings may work together.
That is a more rigorous approach than assuming talented people will automatically be compatible.
Build the Right Team, Not Just Fill the Role
There is no universally ideal candidate who will work equally well with every manager.
Nor is there a single management style that will suit every employee.
Successful hiring depends on more than identifying the most impressive applicant.
It requires understanding the particular combination of people who will need to work together.
For a dual-reporting role, that means evaluating professional capability, measuring interpersonal compatibility across both reporting relationships and establishing clear responsibilities between the managers.
And once the employee joins, leaders should continue to distinguish visible performance from actual commitment and alignment.
The central principle is straightforward:
Don’t assume that because someone is an excellent candidate, they will be an excellent fit with both managers. Measure the relationships.
That is how leaders can make better-informed decisions about the people and working relationships on which their business depends.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do you assess a candidate who will report to two managers?
Evaluate the candidate’s professional competence using interviews and relevant assessments, then measure Interpersonal Alignment separately between the candidate and each prospective manager. The results provide relationship-specific compatibility information that interviews alone cannot establish.
Can someone be compatible with one manager but not another?
Yes. Interpersonal compatibility depends on the particular individuals involved. A candidate may have strong alignment with one manager and weaker alignment with another. This does not mean that either manager or the candidate is inherently unsuitable.
Can interviews measure Interpersonal Alignment?
Interviews can help assess experience, competence and professional judgment, but they do not provide an objective measurement of interpersonal compatibility. An assessment designed to measure the fit between specific individuals is needed for that purpose.
Should the relationship between the two managers also be assessed?
Where appropriate, yes. The two managers have their own working relationship, which can influence how effectively they coordinate responsibilities and priorities. Their Interpersonal Alignment can be considered independently of the candidate’s compatibility with either manager.
Is Interpersonal Alignment the same as Values Alignment?
No. Interpersonal Alignment measures compatibility between two people. Values Alignment measures how well the working environment provides what matters to an individual. They address different dimensions of workplace fit.
Can Interpersonal Alignment assessments be used for both hiring and retention?
Yes. OpenElevator’s assessment methodology supports evaluating interpersonal compatibility in hiring decisions as well as understanding alignment within existing teams. In retention applications, Interpersonal Alignment can be considered alongside Values Alignment to inform appropriate leadership decisions.
Start Your Stay Survey
Whether you’re evaluating new hires or seeking a clearer understanding of your existing team, the quality of working relationships matters.
OpenElevator helps leaders move beyond subjective impressions by measuring Interpersonal Alignment between individuals, alongside the relevant dimensions of employee commitment and Values Alignment.
For employees already working in dual-reporting structures, the OpenElevator Stay Survey provides a practical starting point for understanding alignment and making better-informed retention decisions.
