Recruiting and Ethics

One of my clients received a call recently from a competitor who was upset that my client's firm had hired away one of their employees. The competitor called the action "unethical"—even though the employee was enticed to leave by his brother who worked for my client.  

Is it unethical to hire employees away from a competitor? Many believe it is. Under what circumstances? When a man recruits his brother to join him? What if an outside recruiter had been involved? Is that more ethical? Many seem to think so since they routinely hire headhunters to help them fill openings.

The ethics question is more relevant than ever. We're facing a shortage of qualified professionals and the competition for them will continue to intensify. I'm convinced that firms that follow the old "they find us" approach of simply advertising openings will find themselves at a serious disadvantage. The best hires are usually happily employed, not actively looking. So you need to find them, and there's a good chance they're working for a competitor. Does that cross the line for you? 

I don't pretend to have the definitive answer on ethics in recruiting. But I will encourage you to re-examine your convictions. One of the hallmarks of ethics is consistency. And I see some double standards in the positions many have taken on the morality of modern recruiting strategies. Consider the following questions:

• Do you think it is unethical to directly recruit a candidate currently employed by a competitor?

• What if the candidate works for a firm that is not a direct competitor? Is that more ethical?

• Is it more ethical to use a headhunter to recruit from a competitor than it is to do it yourself? If so, why?

• Is it more ethical to steal a long-term client from a competitor than to steal an employee, even though the damage of the former action is probably greater?

Your answers will likely vary depending on circumstances. For example, you may feel more uncomfortable hiring someone from a competitor you know versus one you don't know. The way you approach the candidate (calling at work vs. calling at home) will probably make a big difference. The main point of my questions is to pose a larger question: Are your responses ethically consistent? If you haven't already done so, let me encourage you to have this discussion with your colleagues. 

Balancing Ethics and Effectiveness

As noted above, the companies that are most successful recruiting take the initiative in identifying and pursuing desirable candidates. They don't just place ads and see what turns up. In many cases this means they are pursuing individuals currently employed by competitors. 

Most technical consulting and design firms still employ the traditional "they find us" approach. In a tighter labor market, will this strategy continue to be adequate for your firm? Or do you need to adopt some form of the "we find them" approach? If the latter, you will need to define how to balance ethics and effectiveness. Here are some suggestions:

u Clarify your firm's ethical boundaries in recruiting. The first step is to assess the ethical consistency of your current practices. For example, I know firm managers who claim that initiating the pursuit of a competitor's employee is wrong, but have no problem hiring an outside recruiter to do the same thing. Plus they offer referral bonuses to employees who bring candidates to the firm (that are subsequently hired), which would seem to encourage the very behavior they call unethical. So where's the line? I think it's important to clarify where your firm stands on the ethics of recruiting.

u Work within the context of relationships. At my last place of employment, I actively recruited a few individuals who I highly valued both as coworkers and as friends. I had a selfish motive, of course, but I also believed I was offering them a better opportunity than their current employers. Is it wrong to recruit a friend? Most would say it's typically not. So a starting point in avoiding the ethical quagmire in recruiting from competitors is to work within existing relationships. This is the intended purpose of referral bonuses, to encourage employees to talk to their friends and former colleagues about joining their firm.

The "we find them" approach is rooted in relationships. Not only does this address some of the ethical dilemma, but it's a far more effective way to recruit. The "they find us" method attracts mostly strangers, where you have to make a quick assessment of the candidate's competencies and character—leading to more than a few hiring disappointments. Building relationships first is a better way when you can do it. Plus recruiting people you know involves less ethical ambiguity than hiring an outside recruiter to steal away someone you don't know from a competitor. 

u Use only recruiters with impeccable ethics. My preference would be to avoid outside recruiters altogether, instead mobilizing your staff to leverage their relationships in meeting your recruiting needs. But that strategy isn't always adequate. So when a recruiter is needed, it's important to select one who embodies your firm's values. The recruiting profession has its share of individuals with questionable ethics. Plus, even among the ethical recruiters, you may not be entirely comfortable with their methods. 

So ask your current or prospective recruiter about their tactics. How do they go about identifying potential candidates, contacting them, screening them, selling the opportunity, helping close the deal? Would they later recruit individuals they've already placed with another firm (some do)? Will the recruiter adhere to your firm's ethical boundaries? Always check out references before hiring a recruiter.   

u Don't oversell the opportunity. When pursuing an impressive candidate, it's expected that you make your best sales pitch. But in your enthusiasm don't overlook your duty to try to ensure a good fit. The candidate's credentials may be stellar, but that doesn't necessarily mean he or she is the right person for the job—or visa versa. Two common mistakes we make are:

• Overselling the job opportunity, either by exaggerating the potential or by failing to disclose some significant issues. This is not always intentional, but misleading nonetheless.

• Failing to acknowledge some serious shortcomings on the candidate's part. For example, overlooking poor interpersonal skills because we're so enamored with the person's technical capabilities.

Integrity in recruiting demands an honest assessment of the benefits and risks for both parties. If you uncover factors that suggest a poor fit—no matter how talented or qualified the individual—talk about it with the candidate and with colleagues involved in the hiring decision. I've seen situations where the firm's honesty in such matters encouraged the candidate to join the firm later, when either the position or the timing was more attractive.

Recruiting in a highly competitive market, much as with marketing and sales, presents a myriad of both tactical and ethical choices. Some firms choose to ignore the most effective strategies, excusing their lack of drive by calling it "more professional" or ethical. Other firms, by contrast, let the pressures of competing cloud their judgment in matters of integrity and ethics. When it comes to recruiting, has your firm adopted practices that are aggressive, effective, and ethical? Or are you struggling to find that middle ground? If the latter, hopefully this article will at least get the dialogue going.

For more information on the "we find them" approach, please see "Fishing for Prized New Hires" and "The Best Recruiting Strategy Is the 'We Find You' Approach."

Copyright © 2006, The Business Edge, all rights reserved  

Home    |    Experience    |    Articles    |    Links    |    Contact