Cyber Directors: Hiring for Offensive and Defensive Security in One Team

Hiring a cyber director who can effectively lead both offensive and defensive security operations has become one of the most challenging recruitment tasks in cybersecurity. Traditional hiring approaches often fall short because they focus on either red team or blue team expertise, missing candidates who can bridge both worlds. This dual-expertise requirement reflects how modern threats demand leadership that understands attack methodologies just as deeply as defence strategies.

Finding the right candidate requires rethinking your entire approach to recruitment. You need someone who can think like an attacker while building robust defences, manage diverse technical teams, and translate complex security concepts into business strategy. The stakes are high because the wrong hire can leave your organisation vulnerable from multiple angles.

Why cyber directors need both offensive and defensive expertise

Modern cybersecurity threats don’t respect the traditional boundaries between offensive and defensive security. Attackers constantly evolve their tactics, using sophisticated techniques that require defenders to think several steps ahead. A cyber director who only understands one side of this equation will struggle to build comprehensive security programmes.

The limitations of single-expertise leadership become apparent across multiple operational areas:

• Communication breakdowns between teams – Red team findings often fail to translate into actionable defensive improvements when leadership lacks cross-functional understanding
• Misinterpreted threat intelligence – Blue team alerts might miss attack patterns that offensive security experts would immediately recognise
• Delayed incident response – Defensive teams may struggle to predict attacker next moves without understanding offensive methodologies
• Inefficient resource allocation – Security investments lack strategic focus when leadership cannot prioritise based on real-world attack likelihood
• Trapped knowledge silos – Offensive security insights remain confined to penetration testing reports rather than informing ongoing defence strategies

A director with dual expertise eliminates these inefficiencies by bridging the gap between attack and defence perspectives. They understand how attackers think, which helps them prioritise defensive investments more effectively. They know which vulnerabilities pose the greatest real-world risks because they’ve seen how those same weaknesses get exploited. This comprehensive understanding leads to more strategic security spending, faster incident response, and better protection outcomes across the organisation.

What makes an effective offensive–defensive security leader

The most effective cyber directors combine deep technical knowledge with strategic thinking abilities. They need hands-on experience with both attack and defence methodologies, but technical skills alone aren’t sufficient. Leadership in this space requires someone who can translate between different security disciplines and communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders.

Key characteristics that distinguish exceptional dual-expertise candidates include:

• Direct operational experience in both domains – Hands-on work conducting penetration tests and building defensive systems, not just managing teams in these areas
• Cross-functional career progression – Evidence of deliberate movement between offensive and defensive roles, showing commitment to understanding both perspectives
• Intuitive decision-making capabilities – Ability to make quick, informed choices during incidents based on deep understanding of attack and defence methodologies
• Adaptive communication skills – Capacity to bridge technical teams with different mindsets, helping red and blue teams learn from each other rather than compete
• Strategic business thinking – Understanding of how security investments align with business objectives and risk tolerance
• Crisis leadership experience – Proven ability to coordinate response efforts while maintaining clear communication with stakeholders at all levels

These characteristics work together to create leaders who can effectively translate offensive security findings into defensive improvements while ensuring business continuity. The best candidates demonstrate how their varied background creates the broad perspective needed for comprehensive security leadership, showing evidence of learning from each role transition and applying insights across different security domains.

Common hiring mistakes when recruiting cyber directors

Many organisations make critical errors when recruiting cyber directors, often treating these roles like standard senior technical positions. These mistakes can result in hiring decisions that compromise security effectiveness and create long-term operational challenges.

The most frequent recruitment pitfalls include:

• Prioritising breadth over depth – Creating lengthy requirements lists with dozens of technologies instead of focusing on deep expertise in core offensive and defensive methodologies
• Overlooking cultural fit assessment – Focusing heavily on technical evaluation while neglecting stakeholder management and communication abilities
• Misaligned assessment methods – Requiring both offensive and defensive expertise but only thoroughly testing one area during the interview process
• Underestimating security-specific leadership – Assuming general management experience automatically translates to effective security team leadership during crisis situations
• Budget-driven decision making – Prioritising salary constraints over candidate quality, despite the high cost of wrong hires in critical security roles
• Standard interview processes – Using generic technical interviews that fail to evaluate dual-expertise capabilities and cross-functional thinking

These mistakes often stem from treating cyber director recruitment as a checkbox exercise rather than a strategic hiring decision. Organisations that fall into these traps frequently end up with leaders who look qualified on paper but struggle with the complex realities of managing integrated security operations. The resulting gaps in leadership effectiveness can persist for years, undermining security programme development and leaving organisations vulnerable during critical incidents.

Building interview processes for dual-expertise candidates

Effective interviews for dual-expertise cyber directors require structured approaches that evaluate both technical capabilities and leadership qualities. Standard interview formats don’t work well because they typically focus on past experience rather than problem-solving abilities across different security domains.

A comprehensive interview process should incorporate these essential elements:

• Scenario-based technical evaluation – Present realistic security incidents requiring candidates to demonstrate both offensive and defensive thinking in their response strategies
• Architecture challenge assessments – Ask candidates to critique existing security designs or propose improvements that balance attack vectors with operational constraints
• Cross-team integration testing – Arrange separate meetings with red and blue team members to evaluate communication adaptation and collaboration facilitation skills
• Business stakeholder interactions – Include executives, legal teams, and compliance officers to test translation of technical concepts into business terms
• Leadership simulation exercises – Present resource allocation decisions, competing priorities, and crisis communication scenarios to reveal management capabilities
• Strategic thinking evaluation – Assess understanding of how security investments align with business objectives and risk management frameworks

This multi-faceted approach reveals how candidates think across different security domains while managing the complex stakeholder relationships inherent in cyber director roles. The process should demonstrate your organisation’s commitment to finding the right fit rather than simply filling a position quickly, as rushed hiring decisions in these critical roles often create expensive long-term consequences that impact security effectiveness for years.

Building a strong cybersecurity leadership team requires expertise in both candidate identification and assessment processes. The complexity of dual-expertise requirements makes this one of the most challenging recruitment areas in the technology sector. We specialise in connecting organisations with cyber directors who bring both offensive and defensive expertise, helping you avoid common hiring pitfalls while accessing candidates who might not appear in traditional recruitment searches. If you are interested in learning more, reach out to our team of experts today.