12 June 2011
Scenario: You have just completed interviewing three candidates for an entry-level position in your organization. One candidate is the friend of a coworker who has implored you to give his friend a chance. The candidate is the weakest of the three but has sufficient skill and knowledge to adequately fill the position. Would you hire this candidate?
Hiring the least qualified person for the job as opposed to the most qualified because they are a friend of another employee could impact the quality of work for the end user and possibly set a very bad example to the other employees within the company.
In this situation there are a couple options with varying levels of ethics. First and most appropriately, I could sit down with Human Resources (HR) and discuss the situation, detailing my discomfort with being approached by my co-worker, with the option of including upper management. But I would personally try to keep it with HR unless they really wanted upper management involved. Second, although definitely not within ethical standards, there is approaching the co-worker who suggested the candidate, to discuss the position, the adequacy of the three candidates and suggest if you hire him he hopes that he pulls through for you and the company.
I would go with a utilitarian approach when coming to my conclusion. With HR you can
throw out ideas such as is the most qualified person actually right for the company.
Just because someone is has the experience and the proper qualifications does not mean that they will fit and be the best choice in the company. This is something you will need to consider for the employee and the company as well. Does the company have a policy stating that the highest qualified candidates be hired? And if not, the discussion of how to approach how and why a candidate that is less qualified would be chosen for hire and would it be favoritism or how can it be...