More of a perception change rather than an actual change I think. FWIW, I've always hired to "fill gaps" and not to "add stars". Now, do I want a great person w

More of a perception change rather than an actual change I think. FWIW, I've always hired to "fill gaps" and not to "add stars". Now, do I want a great person who can fill that gap? Sure. But the priority is the gap, not the person. There are those mythical people for whom "if you interview they will 'make' a position so they can hire you" is said to be true. In my experience, people who are hired because they seem like super stars rather than for a particular role, do not do as well. Why? Because it usually automatically puts them in conflict with the person who is already doing that role, and second, what they should be doing isn't immediately apparent leading to some meandering around which is perceived by upper management as being 'non-productive.'