I joined a firm this winter as the vice-president in charge of recruitment, and part of my job is to screen and select the summer interns. We received hundreds of candidates, including five who are the children of current employees. As I was in the process of selecting the ten who would receive an offer, another vice-president came to my office to tell me that it was “tradition” that children of employees be given first crack at the coveted spots.
In my opinion, only one of the children would make the top 10, and following “tradition” would mean turning down several top-notch applicants. This goes against my personal ethics; I believe in a merit-based system. But I know that breaking with tradition might upset the parents whose children get turned down. Where’s the line?
Upset is not quite the word. If you rock the boat and deny those children what they, and their parents, consider a birthright, there will be hell to pay.
Your merit-based ethic is admirable, especially for a hiring manager who no doubt deals with relatives and friends and friends-of friends on a daily basis. Who you know is part of the game; almost everyone has, at some point in their life, landed a job thanks to a personal connection. It’s not fair; it is what it is.
What’s tricky about your position is that you have come to the conclusion that only one of these children should make the cut. Cronyism can be palatable if it comes down to deciding between two equally qualified candidates. That is not the case here.
But succeeding in business is all about choosing your battles. This one may not be the one to fight. An internship can be a chance for someone to prove themselves, beyond their GPA and extracurriculars. When it’s the children of an employee, it can also be a chance for mom and pop to instill some proper work values in their youngens; to show them how it really happens 9-5; to remind them that, yes, mom and dad really do bust their tail all day long so their children can go to a good college. The kids have probably already been to the office and have some idea of what their parents do, but working side-by-side can give them a much stronger glimpse than they got on “Take Your Child To Work Day.”
Plus, there’s also a very good chance that these interns are going to be back after graduation looking for a full-time job. Getting a good look at them now will help later, especially if that’s when you choose to pick your fight and put the smack-down on cronyism.
That’s not to say you can’t say no to some of the family candidates, but denying four of the five applicants would be too extreme. If you want to stake your position so that you can begin moving away from “tradition” in future years, maybe one would be a good start. If there’s someone who is grossly underqualified, that’s a battle you can win. And it will send a clear message that while children of employees still get preference, they do not have a guarantee. That will prove that you’re no push-over; allow you to build for future intern classes; and, perhaps most importantly, escape malice at the water cooler.
Have a workplace-ethics dilemma? Ask it here, or emailwherestheline@gmail.com
