5 Mistakes Search Agencies Make When Hiring
The short answer: counter offers fail because the decision to leave was made months before the resignation. Money is not what your best SEO is leaving over. They leave when they can no longer see who they become by staying. A pay rise gets you in the room, it never keeps anyone in it. Fix growth, recognition and the calibre of the people around them, and the counter offer conversation never happens.
Josh Peacock is the founder of Search for Hire and has placed over 200 A-player search marketers into agencies and in-house teams since 2021, every placement guaranteed for a full year.
Out of the 200+ placements we’ve made, the candidates the team has either talked to or accepted counteroffers at their current company, about 80% of them don’t make it to 12 months with that same company
Stop waiting for resignation and have this conversation. Have it now.
I get paid to take your best SEO off you. So let me save you the surprise. Right now, while you’re reading this, there’s a real message sitting in your best SEO’s inbox from someone like me. A real job, a real step up, usually about 15 to 20% more money, and you have no idea it’s there.
And when they finally walk in and hand you their notice, you’ll do one thing that feels obvious and almost never works. You’ll offer them more money.
I’ve placed over 200 A-player search marketers into agencies, every one guaranteed for a full year, for some of the biggest brands and fastest-growing agencies in the world. Which means I’ve watched the counter offer war from the winning side more times than you ever will. Nine times out of 10, more money loses.
So I’ll tell you why they actually go, how to spot it six months before the resignation lands, and the one thing that genuinely keeps them. It isn’t cash. It’s never cash.
Let’s start with the mistake, because nearly everyone makes it. Your best SEO resigns. You panic and you do the maths on the spot. They’re on 80, you offer 90. Maybe throw a little title at it as well. And a lot of the time they say yes. Crisis averted. Everyone exhales.
Six months later they’re gone anyway, because the money was never the thing.
A healthy salary gets you in the room. It does not keep anyone in it. Nobody quits over a number. They quit the day they realise that in two years they’ll be doing the same job they’re doing now, just for you.
Instead, offer someone better. That’s the real reason people leave. They can’t see who they become by staying. The offer in their inbox is probably a bit bigger, sure, but the number is not why they say yes. They say yes because I’ve shown them a version of themselves they couldn’t see where they were.
So here’s what it looks like from my side of the phone, the poacher’s side. When a genuinely good SEO agrees to move, it nearly always comes down to one of three things, and not one of them is salary.
This is the big one. The work that stretched them two years ago is muscle memory. They’re not learning anymore. They’re maintaining. And a person who’s stopped growing is already halfway out the door. They just haven’t told you yet.
The uncomfortable bit is you probably promised them growth when you hired them — the development, the progression, who they’d become on your team. Then the day-to-day swallowed it, and that promise quietly turned into a thing you both stopped mentioning.
The fix isn’t complicated, but you have to actually do it. Sell them the next version of themselves, out loud, on purpose.
What can they do in two years on your team that they can’t do today?
Say it to them. Show them the path. Make it real. Get that right, and money stops being the conversation.
Your best person is usually your quietest problem. They just get on with it. Nothing’s ever on fire around them, so you stop thinking about them. And that is exactly the danger. Great work that nobody noticed gets treated like average work, and your best people can feel the difference.
When did you last tell your top SEO specifically what they did that mattered, not a thumbs-up on Slack, specifically? If you can’t remember, I’d put money on it that they can’t either.
This is the one owners underrate the most. A-players do not want to spend their days working with C-players. It’s one of the most demotivating things there is.
Your best SEO wants to be pushed. They want to be in a room where people are pressure-testing each other, catching each other’s mistakes, levelling each other up. If they’re the smartest person on your team by a mile and nobody’s challenging them, they’re not flattered. They are bored. And boredom in your best people doesn’t look like moaning. It looks like calm, quiet, a little bit checked out.
Build a team of A-players who make each other better and that becomes a place people will fight to stay at. Let your best person carry a team of C-players on their back, and someone like me will offer them a room full of their equals, and by the time it looks like a problem to you, they’ve already had two calls with me and picked another start date.
So this is the part I want you to actually steal. Pause and write it down if you have to.
Stop waiting for resignation to have this conversation. Have it now. Sit down with your best person and ask them one thing: “In a year from now, what do you want to be able to do that you cannot do today? And be straight with me, is this the place you’re going to learn it?”
Then stop talking and listen.
If they light up and the answer is obviously yes, brilliant, you’ve got it. If they go vague, if they can’t picture it, if they look at you like they’ve never once thought about it, that is not a nice chat. That’s a warning shot. That’s them telling you they can’t see who they become by staying there, while you can still do something about it.
Back to that counter offer. Why does it fail so reliably? Because by the time someone resigns, the decision was made months ago. The resignation isn’t the start of them leaving, it’s the last five minutes of it. They checked out quietly a long time ago. You just didn’t see it.
So when you throw more money on the table, you’re not fixing the reason they’re going. You’re trying to buy back something you stopped giving them a year ago. And it’s worse than that, it insults them. You’ve just told them that the way to get recognised or properly looked at around here is to go and get another job offer.
A counter offer is a pay rise you only get for threatening to leave, and everyone else in the building learns that lesson very fast.
I’m not guessing at any of this. I watch it happen constantly.
A client comes to us because their best person is about to walk. We get started on the search, and a few days later the message lands: “Actually, we counter offered. We think we’ve kept them.” And the whole team has the same quiet reaction.
We don’t say it to the client, obviously, but we start the clock, because we know that in about three months we’ll get that call again. And nearly every single time, we do.
Let me give you a real one, and this time the shoe was on the other foot, because I was the one hiring.
I wanted someone on one of my teams who was at a big US software company: 300 people, raised over $100 million. I could not compete. Not on salary, not on equity, not on any of it. On paper, I had no business winning that one.
So why did he come? Because one of the biggest reasons he wanted out was this: every time he had an idea, something he wanted to build or change, it had to crawl through 15 people before anything happened. He was brilliant and stuck in the queue.
So I didn’t sell him money. I couldn’t. I sold him a different version of himself. I said: “I’m hiring you for your expertise on a lean team. You don’t come to me unless it’s genuinely massive. You decide, you move, you go. I’m trusting you to act like the expert I’m paying you for.”
And that’s what got him.
Not the money, the autonomy, the chance to use everything he knew without asking permission for it. That company had more money than me, more equity than me, more of everything than me, and they still lost him, because they couldn’t give him the one thing he actually wanted.
Before you go anywhere, run these three on yourself about your best person right now.
And if those answers make you wince, good. That wince is your to-do list.
So the whole thing on one page: your best people do not leave for money. They leave when they can’t see who they become by staying. A pay rise gets you in the room. It never keeps anyone in it. You cannot buy back what you stopped giving.
Your best people are a market. Your competitors are selling to them right now, I know, because I’m one of the people doing the selling.
So my real question for you: if I called your best SEO tomorrow, would they even pick up? And if they did, what would they tell me they’re still learning from you?
If you don’t love that answer, you already know what to do, and what you have to do this week: look after your best person, because someone like me gives them a reason to look up. It’s the cheapest retention you’ll ever run, and you’ve already got everything you need to do it.
Rarely, and not for long. A counter offer addresses salary, which is almost never why someone is leaving. By the time an employee resigns, they made the decision months earlier. The counter offer buys a few months of quiet, then the same person leaves anyway, usually within six months.
Because the pay rise does not change what they were actually unhappy about. In search marketing, that is usually one of three things: they have stopped learning, their work goes unnoticed, or the people around them are not good enough to push them. Money does not touch any of those.
Everyone else learns that the way to get a pay rise is to go and get another job offer. That lesson travels fast. Within a year you tend to see a second resignation from someone who watched the first one get rewarded.
Usually 15 to 20% above current salary. That uplift is what gets someone to take the call. It is almost never what makes them say yes to the job.
Boredom in a high performer does not look like complaining. It looks like calm. They stop pushing, stop arguing in meetings, stop asking for more. If your best person has gone quiet and nothing around them is ever on fire, that is not stability, it is disengagement.
Ask this: “A year from now, what do you want to be able to do that you cannot do today, and be straight with me — is this the place you are going to learn it?” Then stop talking and listen. If they go vague, that is your warning shot.
Sell them the next version of themselves, out loud and specifically. Name what they will be able to do in two years on your team that they cannot do today. Autonomy, ownership and the calibre of their colleagues beat money more often than agency owners expect.
Be realistic about the timeline rather than punitive. Someone who has accepted a counter offer from you is likely to be back on the market within months. Use that window to build a succession plan instead of assuming the problem is solved.
Honestly, not much, and all three guests said as much. AEO (Answer Engine Optimisation), GEO (Generative Engine Optimisation), and AIO (AI Optimisation) are all describing the same shift: search is increasingly being answered by AI platforms rather than a list of blue links. The terminology is still settling across the industry. What matters more than the label is what you're actually doing about it, and right now, the fundamentals of good SEO are the same fundamentals that get you cited by AI platforms.
No, and this was the strongest point of agreement across the episode. Anthony from StudioHawk described it as clients "asking for a Ferrari when they need a Toyota." If your website is technically weak, your content is thin, or you have no link authority, optimising for ChatGPT or Perplexity visibility won't move the needle. The agencies seeing results with AI search are the ones who treated it as the cherry on top of a well-built SEO foundation, not the other way around.
All three guests called it an opportunity, not a threat. AI overviews sit at the top of the organic SERP, they're the first thing a user sees after paid ads. For agencies that learn how to structure content that gets cited in them, it's the biggest piece of SERP real estate available right now. Charlie's view: it's about producing content in a way that speaks to user intent and earns inclusion. That skill is worth building now, not later.
By shifting the metric from traffic to revenue. Click volume is declining across the industry, that's not a forecast, it's already happening. The agencies navigating this best are the ones who repositioned SEO as a commercial driver rather than a traffic play. As Charlie put it, "SEO is now being sold as what it was supposed to be sold as, a revenue-driving practice." Customers aren't going to say no to more revenue. They will push back on a traffic report that's trending down.
Significantly. Anthony made the point that two people searching for the same thing, say, a pair of shoes, may get completely different results based on their browser history, past behaviour, and query phrasing. That means targeting a single keyword is becoming less reliable. What works instead is content that gives Google and LLMs enough context to match it to a wide range of query variants: who the product is for, who it isn't for, what problem it solves, and why it's the best answer. Context-rich content wins over keyword-stuffed content in a personalised search world.
The conversation has moved away from static technical checklists. Given how fast the landscape is shifting, new model releases, Google updates, AI platform changes, specific hard skills have a shorter shelf life than they did two or three years ago. What all three guests converged on was the ability to learn quickly and repeatedly. That said, technical SEO foundations remain important, and any demonstrated experience with AI tools, prompt engineering, or building things (even side projects) is a strong signal. The hard skill that's lost relevance fastest is rote keyword research, the kind that doesn't require judgement.
Evidence of the learning pattern, applied to anything. Anthony's framing was clear: past behaviour is the best indicator of future behaviour. If a junior candidate has built a website, run a side project, completed relevant coursework on their own time, or developed a genuine expertise in any area, that shows the drive and initiative that transfers into SEO. It doesn't need to be polished or finished. It just needs to demonstrate that they've committed to learning something outside of what was required of them.
Because the pace of change means no static skill set stays current for long. Charlie put it directly, a new Claude release or a major model update can shift best practice overnight. In that environment, what matters most is whether someone has the curiosity and adaptability to keep learning. Cultural fit, in this context, isn't about personality match for its own sake. It's a proxy for whether someone will thrive in a fast-moving environment, take ownership, and stay engaged when the playbook changes underneath them.