But treating relatives of employees like normal candidates ain't nothing but trouble!
Apologies to the Fresh Prince, Will Smith. I watched Hancock last night, so you get what you get…
Employees have relatives. They love their relatives. We love them for that – after all, they're good people. There's just this one little problem – feedback's impossible when it comes to taking a relative out of your hiring process. First up, most organizations struggle with frank, honest feedback to candidates about why they were not selected. Add to the mix a high-performing employee who would love to see the person they love experience the same career Nirvana as them, and…. let's just say you generally end up with a failure to communicate that makes Bill and Hillary Clinton in the months following Lewinsky-gate seem downright chatty.
As for the referring party, it's hard to be objective. No one knows that better than me. Consider the following story from KD's career:
The year is 2002. I'm a VP of HR over about 3,000 employees in my unit of a Fortune 500 company. As a part of this unit, I have big staffing needs for big call centers with lots of entry-level jobs that pay $10-12 an hour. You know the type of environments – the one where you have to roll a new hire class of 20 people through every two weeks..
At the same time, I had a great friend that I'll call Chuck. Chuck was a good friend who I consider to be family, so he fits my definition of a relative. Chuck had the skills – communication and smarts – to be president if he wanted. Unfortunately, his wealthy family (we came from different sides of the tracks, yo) had failed to play hardball with him in his 20's when he floated between jobs – they kept providing income for large intervals where he was unemployed. As a result, Chuck would start a new career, be excited about it, but when the invariable grind of getting it done came, he would quit. Since his family never turned off the money faucet, there were no ramifications to his habit and he floated between jobs.
Enter KD. During one of the periods between jobs, Chuck approached me about working at my company. I thought the job was low risk enough in the call center that I put him in the 4 week training class and made him an employee – the recruiter who worked for me was thrilled with him as a candidate and he blew everyone away in the training class. So far, so good.
Then they got out of training. On the first incoming call on the floor of the call center, Chuck took off his head set, set it down and walked out of the building. The manager called me and said, "KD, Chuck just freaking walked out. It was like the trailer to a movie or something".
Damn. That left a mark. And I wasn't surprised. Double damn.
My point is that the road to allowing relatives (which Chuck was to me for all practical purposes) to be entered into to your hiring process is paved with potholes. I knew Chuck's limitations but still wanted to help. I put him in, just like our employees put their relatives in.
Feedback to KD about Chuck after the walkout? Minimal. That would have been like telling Vader you didn't like the color of the Death Star, right?
Just like feedback to your employees on relatives who aren't selected as part of your process. It's tough. That's OK, the public humiliation for me was enough, thank you very much…
Words from the master:
"but it just goes to show, not trying to bust your bubble,
but relatives as candidates ain't nothing but trouble.
so the next time an employee tries to give you the play,
just remember my rhymes and get the **** away.
**Disclaimer: If you're in as a relative and performing at a high level, good for you. I like that. I'm just sayin' you're the exception…
Great article!
It poses a very interesting problem as approx 40% of people out there find there new job by utilizing thier network.
If it works you get 2 employees in “friendly” competition to out perform one another. If it fails you have 2 employees “taking off thier head” sets and walking off the job!
Everything seems to go back to genuine and direct communication.
Growing up, my Italian grandparents owned/ran a construction business that, for over 50 years, employed only family members. Don’t misunderstand though, the definition of “family” was as loosely interpreted as one would expect from Italians.
I would often hear my grandfather say to my father, “…but Anthony, Tony’s cousin Jimmy is down on his luck. He needs this job.”
The result? Jimmy would get the job (without an interview or skills assessment), he’d work diligently for a few months until he started to get bored. Then he’d start showing up late and being a top notch slacker, which would go unchallenged because “he’s family”. Finally, after a huge family argument he’d go find something else to do. In the end, the only thing that suffered was company morale.
When my dad took over the family business the first thing he did was let it be known that, “there’s no place for family in a family business”. He rarely hired family members because he knew that the true success of the company depended on being able to make business based decisions without being influenced by relationships.
in my 17 short years as an HR professional, i can honestly say that i can not recall one single instance in which hiring a relative turned out to be a good thing.
Networking is the best way to find jobs. However, smart employers know that high quality employees that are worried about quality and being the best will not refer such individuals to ‘important’ jobs.
Hence, the ‘ok’ for a lower level job. When it comes to relatives it can be touchy you dont want to let your high performing employee down, but when you know its a relative, that doesnt count at a social network its a family network and when it comes to family the rules of professionalism doesnt apply.
it’s always best to have a policy that relatives would have to have historical proof, i.e., letters of recommendations, credentials above average, as well as other things to be deemed a serious employment option.
http://www.powercareernow.com/
What do y’all think of the “courtesy interview”? Is it right to waste time interviewing someone who is or may be unqualified as a courtesy to the referring party?