Question

For the past six months, you’ve been heading a hiring committee in charge of hiring a new division manager. It’s been a grueling process—filtering through thousands of applications, seemingly endless meetings and discussions debating people’s qualifications, so many interviews in different cities that it’s hard to remember whom you met and where, and even more debates about who should be flown to your headquarters for a day of final interviews.

But it’s almost over now. After so many interviews, meetings, and discussions the committee has settled on a candidate that everyone thinks is ideal for the job—Ivy-league educated, lots of management experience, a great personality, driven to succeed, willing to learn etc. He was near the top of your list when you began this process six months ago, and here he is now, in first place at the finish line.

You head into the last hiring committee meeting with lots of relief. Not only are you happy that you found the right person for the job, but you’re really glad that this meeting is just going be a formality. No more debates or arguments about applicants’ work experiences, education, or hobbies. Just walk on in, take a quick vote, and then make a call with the job offer.

But as you walk into the committee meeting, there’s a strange vibe. Some people look quite worried, whereas others are just angry. When you ask what’s going on, one of the committee members responds that in the past few days, she added the final candidate as a friend on Facebook, and what she found on his profile was quite disturbing. There were several photos of him passed out on the sidewalk after drinking too much. Other photos showed him smoking marijuana at a friend’s apartment. Another photo shows him wearing a Nazi costume for what you assume is a Halloween party. And then there’s the language—almost all of his posts are filled with obscenities.

After seeing all of this, half the committee wants to go with another candidate. They can’t imagine that this is the kind of person they want leading your company’s most important division. The other half of the committee thinks it’s not a big deal at all. They believe that how he spends his personal time has absolutely no reflection on his ability to manage, and they’re angry that committee members would try to use it against him.

So here you are, faced with a split (and angry) committee. They’re looking to you to make or break the deadlock—should we hire this guy or move on to someone else?

Questions:

1. What decision would you make? Would you hire this person or re-open the search?

2. In your opinion, are companies justified in using an applicant’s Facebook or Twitter account when considering them for a job?

3. Do you believe that a company should be concerned with how a potential employee spends his or her personal time?

Answer 1