Civil Engineering Firms and Hiring Retired Military

MET • August 28, 2012

This week I was thrilled to hear a client say, “My ideal candidate would be someone who was in a leadership role in the Army Corps of Engineers, Navy, etc.” Throughout my 20+ years as an executive recruiter for the civil engineering industry,  I have usually heard the opposite.

 

U.S. civil engineering firms have tended to seek executive candidates who have run or are running other competitor consulting firms. It is certainly not politically correct to say, but I recall hearing, “let someone else train those candidates what it means to make money and stay on budget. We don’t have the luxury to do so.”

 

It seems that there are stronger arguments to be offered for hiring retired/ex-military. Traditionally, these are people who have been given assignments, challenges and missions with direction to accomplish them. They must succeed under unique circumstances, overcoming difficult obstacles.  They have been trained how to lead and motivate teams not only on a group level but an individual one.  These candidates can bring a unique and fresh perspective to the corporate climate.

 

To tell a retired colonel who has successfully lead significant programs and large teams while navigating difficult terrain, that he isn’t the best candidate to run a civil engineering department, has been difficult and often frustrating. During this period of civil engineering rebuilding, I hope to see new perspectives on hiring retiring military!

 

What has been your experience?

The Metzner Group Blog

By Carol Metzner October 22, 2025
Last night, I had an unsettling phone call with a client. It pushed me to assess whether "the client is always right." Here is what I came up with: In executive recruitment, "the client is always right" is a guiding principle. After all, clients trust us to understand their needs, align with their vision, and deliver top-tier talent. But what happens when that principle collides with another: the duty to place candidates into environments where they can thrive? Every recruiter has that moment of realization—a client may seek a professional, but their leadership style, company culture, or expectations send up red flags. Perhaps their demands are unrealistic, or their treatment of candidates raises ethical concerns. These situations challenge recruiters to balance two critical priorities: maintaining client relationships and protecting candidates from potentially detrimental placements. As recruiters, we’re not just matchmakers but stewards of careers and livelihoods. Candidates trust us to help them take the next step in their professional journey. If a client demonstrates behaviors or values that could lead to a toxic environment, we must assess and address the situation with integrity. This doesn’t mean severing ties with challenging clients immediately. Open communication is key—have a candid conversation to understand their expectations and share your observations. Sometimes, clients are unaware of how their actions or words come across and are willing to adjust. However, if it becomes clear that their approach contradicts your commitment to ethical placements, it may be time to reconsider the partnership. Ultimately, I have decided that "the client is always right" has its limits. As an executive recruiter, my reputation hinges on filling roles and making placements that benefit both sides. Walking away from a mismatched client might feel like a loss in the short term, but in the long run, it reinforces my integrity and ensures the candidates I work with continue to see me as an ally in their careers. After all, my genuine client is the principle of finding the right fit—for everyone involved. What are your thoughts? #civilengineeringexecutivesearch #architectureexecutivesearch #executivesearch #AEP #ethics #recruiterinsights
By Carol Metzner October 22, 2025
Many of us understand the significance of both short-term gains and long-term investments. When evaluating a new opportunity, the financial package plays a critical role—it reflects the value of your expertise and supports your aspirations, both today and in the future. However, compensation should not be the only compass. A truly strategic decision considers how the role aligns with your vision, challenges your abilities, and fuels your capacity to lead with impact. The right opportunity integrates financial reward with culture and mission that drive fulfillment, growth, and purpose. One should not accept an offer solely based on money, nor should one reject an offer solely because of financial reasons. Leadership is about balancing head and heart, value and vision. Let’s prioritize decisions that secure not just wealth but meaning. What principles guide your career decisions? #Architecture #CivilEngineering #ExecutiveSearch #Recruiter #AE #RecruiterInsights