You've narrowed your search down to your final candidate. You're ready to extend a job offer and begin calling a few references and searching on the Internet. You discover your top candidate:
1. was accused but not convicted of murder.
2. was kicked out of school for cheating.
3. only worked in his family business or got jobs because of his family.
4. has been seen partying often on his Facebook page.
I imagine your answer would be a resounding NO.
But my early morning review of my favorite blogs today posed a challenging question: Would You HIRE Ted Kennedy?
I sense that my colleague Dr. Mercer is not a fan of Ted Kennedy from the tone of his questions. But unless you've been living in a cave for the past days, you can't ignore the admiration and even veneration that tens of millions of people feel for this man and his accomplishments. Despite his incredible history of potentially career-ending character flaws even his harshest critics were awed by many of his skills, most notably his gift of negotiation and building collaboration, or commonly describe in this Beltway euphemism: "reaching across the aisle."
So I ask you: Confronted with an opportunity to hire an individual with Ted Kennedy's unique gifts, could you overcome the gut-wrenching and value-challenging emotional decision to ignore his character flaws? Before you answer....I implore you to think because I know many of you have hired or retained employees despite convictions for embezzlement, theft, sexual harassment, hostility, and drug abuse. You've likely hired people who have had questionable attendance records and harsh criticism from previous employers. But still you hire or retain them because you want to give them a second chance. Other times you may believe the benefits they bring to your organization outweigh the risks that the questionable character brings to your organization. You believe that this time could be different - it's a different time and different place. Your caulk up these indiscretions to youth, immaturity, and stress.
What happens when an individual brings along a legacy-like track record of accomplishments and achievements? When can or should you overlook a negative work history and offer an individual a second chance or take the chance that this time will be different when their potential for good can outweigh the risks?
As an aside: Dr. Mercer's post goes onto suggest how pre-employment testing can help expose character or attitude flaws that if for no other reason (if you choose to ignore the results) will give you advance warning of potential problems. As he writes in his blog description, "Pre-employment tests and other methods help you avoid hiring connivers, scoundrels, and people with character flaws you never want in your company."
I concur with his recommendation and found his question about hiring an individual with an impressive track record but only in a family business an intriguing one. What do you think?
Read more about Pre-Employment Testing & Hiring by Dr. Mercer: Would You HIRE Ted Kennedy?.
Comments