Your hiring manager wants a Senior Product Manager with 10 years of experience in SaaS, deep technical background, proven track record at scaling companies from Series A to IPO, exceptional communication skills, and the ability to start next week.

Budget: $90K.

Location: In office, five days a week, in a city with high cost of living.

Your job: make this happen.

This is where most recruiters fail—not because they can't source, but because they never reset unrealistic expectations. Here's how to have the hard conversation that saves the search.

The Warning Signs Your Hiring Manager Is Living In Fantasy Land

Red flag #1: The compensation is 20-30% below market "We can't compete on salary, but our culture is great!" is not a hiring strategy.

Red flag #2: The requirements list includes 10+ must-have skills Nobody has all of those. You're not hiring a person—you're describing a team.

Red flag #3: They want someone who's done exactly this job at exactly this company before Perfect pattern-matches don't exist. And if they do, they're not looking for jobs.

Red flag #4: Timeline expectations are aggressive but process is slow "We need someone ASAP but I can only interview on Thursdays and I'm traveling for three weeks" doesn't work.

Red flag #5: They're comparing your candidate pool to people who would never take this job "Why can't we get someone like [senior leader at major tech company]?" Because that person makes $400K and you're offering $120K.

If you see these red flags and don't address them immediately, the search will fail. Then you'll get blamed.

The Conversation You Need To Have (Before You Start Recruiting)

Don't start sourcing until you've had this conversation:

You: "I want to make sure we're aligned on what's realistic for this search. Let me share what I'm seeing in the market based on these requirements."

Then present data:

• "For someone with this experience level in this location, market comp is [range]. We're currently [X%] below that."
• "I've looked at LinkedIn and found [number] people who match these requirements. Of those, [much smaller number] are realistically reachable."
• "Based on similar searches we've done, this type of candidate typically takes [timeframe] to close, and we're competing with [competitors offering X, Y, Z]."

Then ask:

"Given that, I want to understand: what's more important—getting someone quickly, or finding someone who checks every single box? Because optimizing for both isn't realistic with this budget and timeline."

Force the conversation about tradeoffs.

How To Present Market Data Without Being Told "Just Do Your Job"

Some hiring managers get defensive when you present data that contradicts what they want to hear. Here's how to frame it:

Wrong approach: "This is impossible. Your expectations are unrealistic. We'll never fill this role."

Why it fails: You're criticizing them. They'll get defensive and tell you to try harder.

Right approach: "I want this search to succeed, so let me share what I'm seeing in the market and we can strategize together about how to adjust."

Why it works: You're framing it as collaborative problem-solving, not criticism.

Use specific data:

• "I pulled compensation data from [Glassdoor/Levels.fyi/Payscale] for this role in this market. Here's what I found."
• "I searched LinkedIn for candidates matching these requirements. There are [X] people. Of those, [Y] are actively looking based on their activity."
• "I talked to three candidates this week who fit the profile. All three declined to move forward when they learned the comp range. Their feedback was [specific feedback]."

Hiring managers can argue with your opinion. They can't argue with data from actual candidates.

The "Must-Have vs. Nice-To-Have" Exercise That Saves Searches

Most job descriptions list everything as a requirement. Your job is to force prioritization:

You: "I want to make sure we're focusing on the right candidates. Let's go through this list and separate must-haves from nice-to-haves."

Go through every requirement and ask:

• "If someone was excellent at [skill A, B, C] but didn't have [skill D], would we interview them?"
• "What's the minimum acceptable level of experience with [technology/skill]?"
• "Is this something we can train, or does the person need to come in with it?"

By the end, you should have:

3-5 must-have requirements: These are non-negotiable. Everyone you present must have these.

5-10 nice-to-have requirements: These are differentiators but not disqualifiers.

Now you have a realistic target profile instead of an impossible unicorn.

How To Reset Compensation Expectations

This is the hardest conversation, but it's essential:

Wrong approach: "Your budget is too low. We need to increase it."

Right approach: "Based on the market data I'm seeing, candidates with this experience are getting offers in the [range]. Here are three options:

1. Increase the budget to match market rates and we'll have access to the full candidate pool
2. Keep the current budget and adjust the requirements to target earlier-career candidates who match our comp range
3. Keep the current budget and requirements and understand this search will take 3-6 months and we may not find anyone

Which approach makes the most sense for your team?"

Present options. Let them choose. Document the choice.

How To Manage Timeline Expectations

Hiring managers always want someone "as soon as possible." Your job is to define what that actually means:

You: "I want to set realistic expectations on timeline. Based on the requirements and market, here's what a realistic process looks like:

• Weeks 1-2: Source and screen candidates, present initial slate
• Weeks 3-4: First round interviews
• Weeks 5-6: Second round interviews and reference checks
• Week 7: Offer and negotiation
• Week 8: Notice period (most candidates need 2-4 weeks)

That means we're looking at 8-12 weeks from now until someone starts. Does that align with your expectations, or do we need to adjust the process?"

If they say "That's too long, we need someone in three weeks," respond with:

"I understand the urgency. To hit that timeline, we'd need to compromise on [requirements/process/comp] because there's no way to source, vet, and close a senior candidate in three weeks. What would you be willing to compromise on?"

Force the conversation about tradeoffs.

What To Do When They Still Insist On The Impossible

Sometimes hiring managers won't budge. They want the unicorn, at below-market comp, starting next week. Here's your move:

You: "I hear you. Let me start the search based on these requirements and report back in two weeks with what I'm finding. If we're not getting the response we hoped for, we can regroup and adjust strategy. Sound good?"

Why this works: You're not arguing. You're agreeing to try, but setting a checkpoint to reassess.

Then, in two weeks:

You: "As we discussed, I've been sourcing for this role. Here's what I've found:

• Contacted [X] candidates matching the profile
• [Y] responded
• Of those, [Z] moved forward after learning about comp/requirements/location
• Here's the specific feedback I'm getting: [candidate quotes]

Based on this, I recommend we [adjust comp/adjust requirements/adjust timeline]. What do you think?"

Now you have proof that the original plan isn't working. Data beats opinions.

How To Present Candidates Who Don't Check Every Box

You found a great candidate. They have 80% of what the hiring manager wants. But the hiring manager said everything was a must-have.

Here's how to present them:

Wrong approach: "This person doesn't have [missing skill], but I think you should interview them anyway."

Right approach: "This candidate is strong in [strength A, B, C], which were our top priorities. They don't have [missing skill], but here's why I think they're worth considering: [specific reason]. They've demonstrated they can [relevant example of adaptability/learning]. Would you be open to a conversation with them?"

Frame it as an opportunity, not a compromise.

The Documentation That Saves You Later

When expectations are unrealistic and the search fails, hiring managers often blame recruiting. Protect yourself:

Document the intake conversation: Send a follow-up email summarizing the requirements, budget, timeline, and any concerns you raised. "Just confirming we're aligned: targeting [profile] with [requirements] at [comp range], aiming to have someone start by [date]."

Track candidate feedback: When candidates decline or ghost, document why. "Candidate declined due to comp 30% below expectations." This becomes your evidence later.

Report regularly: Send weekly updates showing activity (candidates contacted, responses, pipeline status). This shows you're working, even if results aren't coming.

Escalate early: If it's week four and you have no viable candidates, don't wait until week eight to say the search isn't working. Escalate immediately with data.

The Bottom Line

Unrealistic hiring manager expectations kill more searches than bad sourcing. Your job is to reset those expectations early, present data that shows what's realistic, and force conversations about tradeoffs.

How to do it:

• Identify red flags before you start recruiting (below-market comp, impossible requirements, unrealistic timelines)
• Present market data showing what's realistic
• Force prioritization with must-have vs. nice-to-have exercises
• Reset comp expectations with data and options
• Manage timeline expectations with clear process outlines
• Document everything so you're protected when searches fail
• Report regularly and escalate early when things aren't working

The hiring managers who respect you most are the ones you push back on. Because you're saving them from wasting months on a failed search.

The Fast Version:

• Spot unrealistic expectations early: below-market comp, impossible requirements, aggressive timelines with slow processes
• Present market data before starting the search
• Force prioritization of must-haves vs. nice-to-haves
• Give hiring managers options with tradeoffs clearly stated
• Document everything and report regularly
• Escalate early when searches aren't working