Ethics in recruiting, abortion, waterboarding, affirmative action, gay marriage, religion

Perhaps this will come as a surprise to some in this community but recruiting leads to winners and losers - someone receives a new opportunity and others are left to (a) fill in the holes left by someone's departure and (b) others are "hurt" because they weren't selected for the new opportunity - as a candidate and in all likelihood as internal candidates on both sides of the departure. This scenario cascades because like the sliding block game, there is always a significant amount of movement as a result of the opening being filled.

As recruiters we are part of the great game of global commerce and to make the machine work, we are typically called upon when time is short and needs are great; damned the torpedoes, full speed ahead. Projects require completion and few have time to have a lovely chat with the receptionist when the carrot is dangling deliciously before our eyes. We balance the building of the relationship that may lead to names with the immediate calling past a gatekeeper that will lead to names because that is why we are called upon. Let your arrow fall towards one side or the other given the heading of your moral compass but stop berating me for the direction where mine is pointed.

The banality of this thread has been played in our community since the advent of recruiting blogging and never leads to anything productive - other than perhaps people (a) posting in a huff, (b) leaving in a huff, or (c) being banished from a community and subsequently strewing a substantial amount of Internet trash in response.

Ethics in recruiting is no different than abortion, waterboarding, affirmative action, gay marriage, religion and other hot topic issues - there are differing opinions based upon upbringing. It can be debated until the end of days and then some - all to no avail. But to those who can't help themselves, at the very least provide a cogent argument - meaning provide some data that supports your side of the issue and wipe the welling spit balls from the corners of your mouth. If you want to be Pollyannish that is your right but keep it to yourself - or do it quietly.

Otherwise your just part of the show and just like Jerry Albright, I'll need to get some popcorn.

Comment by Tina Huckabay on November 20, 2008 at 2:27pm: Well said! That thread needed to end many posts ago.

Comment by Steve Levy on November 20, 2008 at 7:54pm: The pathetic element of "that thread" is that as of 7:19 PM EST 14/107 posts were written by one rabid person whose typical response is to let the world of recruiting know that she is ethical, that you too can be like her, and most obnoxiously, she denigrates those whose skill sets enable them to do things she cannot. Eventually the thread will die because the usual foils will realizing that fencing with someone like her will not (a) save the world, (b) end world hunger, (c) find a cure for AIDS, or (d) generate revenue.

For years, this pattern has been in the recruiting public's eyes and every time it distills down to what this person recently wrote...

MY question is the WHY -- and that is One question that Noone has answered yet for me.. WHY are we glorifying the Need to lie in this Industry.. the need to lie in ANY industry actually..

"Answered yet for me..." (sorry, I added an additional period): it's always about her.

"WHY are we glorifying the Need to lie in this Industry..." (sorry, once again I added an additional period): no one has glorified whatever "unethical" techniques to which this person is alluding. Since no one has ever produced statistics showing that we have a pervasive problem in our industry - oh she thinks she has by showing old Better Business Bureau statistics or EEO suits but we are a litigious society and it is easy to lodge a complaint, obtain an injunction, and force a company to settle rather than fight - the subjective statistics simply do not add up.

I'm sure the thread will continue on for 20 or so more posts until it tails off; and nothing will be solved. NAPS won't get involved, EEOC won't get involved, and she'll claim support as evidenced by the hundreds of private emails she receives. Then it will go dormant until the next time someone asks a similar question. It may be months or even years but it will happen again...