I’ve developed a new lexicon when describing the range of Chief of Staff positions.

EA (+) Plus to CEO (-) Minus.

Or: someone who does more than what a traditional EA would do up to someone who could step in to do most (but not all) of what the CEO does.

One of the best things about the Chief of Staff role is that there is a version of the role available to just about anyone who wants to enter the field.

What makes it tricky is that, unlike other roles, there isn’t always a title differentiator to offer clues about leveling.

When someone tells me they need a Chief of Staff I ask follow-up questions to ascertain the level and type of support they actually need.

Are you looking for a do-er or a strategizer?
What other support staff is in place?
What is the organization’s growth phase (i.e do they need a reboot on practices)?
Is it a newly created position or a backfill?
Will this person manage a function (or more)?
How much input do you want to give into the work product and strategy-setting?

Having this conversation gives me clues beyond the role description (which doesn’t always clearly articulate the type of experience and capability needed for the role) so I can make an informed recommendation and point them toward the right match.