A quick little intro for those of you tuning in to the Big Bad Recruiting Blog Swap... My name is Tod Hilton and I will be your host for this post. What I am: a software developer at Microsoft and a bunch of other things [father, husband, gamer, snowboarder, etc.]. What I’m not: a recruiter or hiring manager, although I do interview candidates and give the infamous ‘hire’ or ‘no-hire’ recommendation.
I am going to segue off of David’s previous post, Students, careers & social networking, and give you my thoughts on the murky waters of... Should a person’s personal, ‘outside-of-work’ persona be considered by an employer? My answer: yes and no. :-) I know, you’re probably thinking “what a typical ambiguous answer from yet another corporate drone,” but you couldn’t be further from the truth.
First of all, as an interviewer I do search for candidate information online. College papers, blogs, personal hobby sites, forum posts, yada-yada-yada. I think you can find some very valuable stuff out there. For instance, if we’re interviewing someone who has a blog then I can get some real insight into their thoughts over a period of time versus a 60 minute interview. In the case of software development, it’s a real boon if they have a web site that showcases some personal projects they have tackled. There isn’t room for extra stuff like this on a resume, but it can really sway an interviewer’s opinion.
So back to my ‘yes-and-no’ answer...
The “NO” side: I believe very strongly that everyone should be allowed to express their own opinions/beliefs. I wouldn’t even bother blogging if I couldn’t state my own opinions; it would be a complete waste of my time. Along with that, for the most part I feel that those opinions really should not be considered by prospective employers. For example, I can believe wholeheartedly in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and still give 110% at work. I can also be a video game addict [where’s the local chapter meeting this week?] while also delivering above-and-beyond my commitments at work. We’re all individuals and our employers should not only recognize that, but embrace it.
The “YES” side: Even though we should all be allowed to express our own opinions and beliefs, that doesn’t give us the right to do so in a disrespectful manner. We all have different opinions, but [in my opinion :-)] mature people can discuss them in a respectful way without being insulting, condescending or belittling. In keeping with my Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) example... If someone were to have a web site dedicated to spreading the FSM gospel that’s fine and dandy. But if they did so in a way that insulted, cajoled or belittled all other religions then I would begin to wonder what kind of person are they. Are they going to handle work conflicts the same way, by simply attacking everyone around them? Will they be able to resolve conflicts through compromises or will they only be able to see their perspective and never reach a resolution? I’m sure you see where I’m going with this...
You might consider the persona you present online to be personal and none of your employer’s business, but you also need to remember that your personal actions reflect on you as a whole. At Microsoft, it’s an important part of the hiring process to make sure that candidates are compatible with our company values. Anything you put online about yourself has the potential to influence this process, whether or not that is your intention.
I want to leave you with one final thought. Remember that whatever you post on the internet will live a long, long time...maybe even forever! Public forums, web sites, blogs and newsgroups are archived by several companies (i.e.: Google) so before you hit that “Submit” button keep in mind that whatever you just wrote will still be available in 1, 2, 5, 10 years.
Oh Gee, I better not talk like that online. Yesterday the Info-Czar opened his blog to tod (that's how he signs his name). tod works for Microsoft. He's a manager. And he wouldn't hire Tom Paine because Tom criticized religion... [continue]
Your Online Persona from Blue Sky Resumes Blog
tracked on 7/8/2006 at 12:49 p.m. PT
Probably the hottest topic in recruitment right now, is the whole issue of online networking and what it means for job seekers. I blogged about this as a guest writer for excelera8ion and my post came at about the exact...... [continue]
Look at you posting on a recruiting blog. I love it!
Watch out, you might get sucked into the vortex and become one of "us" ; )
Good points...
posted 7/5/2006 at 2:08 p.m. PT by Scott Axel
I don't think I can give a 100% yes or no on this one. But I am leaning more towards the yes. While I agree that someone should be able to do what they want outside of the office... what they choose to do in public is a totally different situation. If I am recruiting for someone to be in a "face of the company" position... they need to be able to portray the company values and ideals at all times when in the public.
Oh.. and for your final thought... I can still find old USENET postings I did 14 years ago.. scary...
Here's why I vote "no"
posted 7/5/2006 at 2:58 p.m. PT by George Blomgren
My younger colleagues and the candidates I talk to find the idea that their musings in cyberspace might be subject to scrutiny extremely disturbing. As such, as the war for talent heats up, this practice (or even the perception of it) would have a devastating impact on an employer's reputation/brand. Not worth the mixed benefits that Tod so aptly summarizes, IMHO.
George Blomgren http://employment.typepad.com
I too tend towards voting "no"
posted 7/6/2006 at 12:31 p.m. PT by Cheryl Hardy
It is SUCH a slippery slope. We all know heavy internet users who can search and find anything on the web. So quietly, this is already done by the very web savviest recruiters in the business. We simply can't regulate and ensure what information is deemed "helpful" or insightful, or which information might just be...inciteful.
Wow does anyone remember the wonderful Censorship of Senator Joseph McCarthy and that dreaded word McCarthyism -
So what does what a person do in their personal life have to do with their ability to do their job?
Will we not hire someone because we find out online that they are married to a person of color? Or that they enjoy the occassional alcohol beverage after work..
Are you going to choose not to hire someone because they support the Union.. (oops the DOL and NLRB will have a field day on this one)
What about the fact that they support gay rights, or an activist of sorts in their private life.. which by the way should be indeed be their private life..
Hey, are you going to not support their rights to open marriage, and that they like to swing, because you have a problem with that?
Last time I remembered freedom of Religion (believe or not believe) was part of the American Constitution.
I realize that this is all rhetoric.. for sure, but seriously, if a person get's their job done, and keep what they do in their private life private, then what business is it of yours the company to be questioning it?
What a dangerous li'l tool the internet becomes when we do personal informational/background checks without permission, and uncover little details that just go against another individuals Holy Grail, and of course that has Nothing to do with the Job description, qualifications necessary, or ability to do the job..
So do we label ourselves Private Investigators today, instead of recruiters?
By the way, again recognize that this is not a True story, but will like to add this anyways - It is also unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices (this includes selection, hiring or firing)and other terms and conditions of employment that discriminate based on religion - Title VII
So I wonder as this could be considered unfair treatment, another way to look at it is that it has the potential for adverse disparate treatment.. So I wonder if going out to the wide world net to invade and discover my PERSONAL, non employment, Non Job related, secret life would not be considered adverse disparate treatment as well..
Personally, I see the unofficial, w/o permission, infomational background checks as another great witchhunt of the New Century. A couple statements online, and we have conclusive evidence that that person is NOT a fit for a business culture and of course won't fit in.. HMMMM
feedback from tod'
posted 7/8/2006 at 12:23 p.m. PT by Recruiting Animal
[These remarks are from the tod (verbatim) and are merely posted via the Canadian Headhunter]
Boy, thanks everyone for the comments! I’m really glad to see the discussion that has ensued. Good stuff!
Remember, my answer to the question was yes AND no. The bottom line I want to get across is that we all need to be aware of the world we live in and realistic about its usage. The internet is a public domain. As individuals we should always keep this in mind when posting something online. Think of it this way, would you run around your neighborhood, office or school shouting out “the Seattle Seahawks suck” or “the Pittsburgh Steelers rock” in your loudest voice? Because that’s what you’re doing whenever you post something online…whether you intend to or not. With regard to the question of whether or not employers should consider this information…see my response to Karen below.
And now for the individual replies…
Heather- Thanks, but no thanks. As I said in a comment on your blog…just give me Visual Studio and a good functional spec so I can write some code. :)
Scott- I think someone who is going to be a ‘public face’ for any company should pay even closer attention to what they do online.
George- The benefits are most certainly mixed and in my opinion the worth is up to the individual recruiter/hiring manager to decide.
Cheryl- Yes, a very slippery slope indeed. I’m an open minded person, at least I like to think so, and feel that I can differentiate between insightful versus inciteful (nice pun, btw :). Obviously the difference will vary for everyone and that’s where we really start to slip-n-slide as the practice is applied with different principles in mind.
Karen- Boy, that was a mouthful wasn’t it. :) I think comparisons to witch-hunting and McCarthyism are a bit extreme and would not be the general application. At least I would hope not. I agree wholeheartedly that a person’s personal life shouldn’t matter if it doesn’t affect their ability to perform their job. That’s the rub…as long as it doesn’t affect their ability to perform their job. Let me give a scenario using software development as an example, say I want to hire the best person for the job and [living in reality] that means more than someone who knows how to code inside and out. It means someone who can communicate with non-technical people, who is willing to share their code with other developers so the whole team can benefit, who is willing to visit mistakes (their own and others) in a non-confrontational way that will allow everyone to benefit. There are a lot more, but those are some highlights of what I would like to see. If a candidate has a public blog in which he/she discusses their current work situation and they describe really ugly, unresolved confrontations with co-workers then as an interviewer/recruiter I would be stupid not to address that. They screamed it out to the world and now I’m using that information to make an educated/informed decision…not to discriminate. Do I want someone in my group that cannot resolve conflicts? Do I want someone who could create a bunch of churn between co-workers? Would that person spend more time creating conflicts than getting features coded? All of those could potentially destroy my group’s morale, cohesiveness and ability to even deliver a product. How's that for a mouthful? ;-)
I also recommend you check out Louise Fletcher’s post, Online Personal Brands (http://www.exceler8ion.com/2006/07/07/blogswap-week-1-louise-fletchers-take-on-online-personal-brands/), as she gives a very succinct opinion on the subject.
Thanks to the Canadian Headhunter for posting my comment since I didn’t want to create [yet another] login/user id to keep track of [or more likely forget about].
I do agree my response was indeed a mouthful; Do I think my comments re Witch Hunt or McCarthy were extreme.. Nah, unfortunately I don't, but I guess I am a stubborn li'l idiot sometimes. Oops, guess there goes another strike against me.. I publicly acknowledged I was stubborn.
In response to your anology - In concept that looks great on paper... really It does.. but I wonder, would you even interview the candidate to determine what the dispute was about? the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Let's use Enron as an example. No not an extreme example, but maybe a poster Child example - There was once a woman who worked at Enron, her name was/is Sherron Watkins.
Today, Sheron is considered a Hero, but For some time Sherron was not considered a Team player, she may have even been thought as a trouble maker, problem child within the group. Why? because she felt that she was faced with an ethical dilema.
In my recruiting tenure I have come accross numerous situations where an individual had an excellent long term employment history, was a team player, but due to a particular situation - Maybe they did not approve of the discrimination or unfair treatment of employees, maybe they noticed that their team was not performing their coding correctly, taking short cuts and costing their company millions (maybe a bad example but please get my drift), maybe they saw shrinkage or other issues within the staff..
Now that person may be considered one who was unable to get along with the team because they were trying to do right by the company, a staff member, or the team.. they are considered a bad team player, but that may not have been the case in their previous employment.
It is easy for us to get caught up in our own belief system automatically and instantly prejudge. So I do believe that this does play an extremity factor to recruiting. As Louise said - it will indeed be interesting to see how it plays out..
My bet.. lawsuits, and stronger audits.. audits to see how you are determining the qualifications of candidates, reasons why candidates are being turned down.. (ofccp will be a breeze compared to what may be the negative outcome from this)
Just another Prediction I see looming in this industry.
I wonder, how did companies ever survive without the Internet to do our job for us? Without all these recruiting new fangled tools.
I don't think it has made our job easier.. Actually, it seems to have taken away from the most important part of any company.. The Human Factor.
Wow, another Long winded response...
Again thanks for your response.. I do respect your point of view even if we don't agree.
I totally blacklisted myself.. Now I will be considered Argumentative and 'onery! wow! it could be dangerous in today's recruiting world to stand up for rights --
Tod, just because this may be the trend this doesn't mean it is legal or Right.. if people don't fight for their rights on this matter, then this trend could continue. I don't see how it can!
I often here arguments how companies should be able to do as they please, and hire who they wish..
Well, if that was the case then they should not have to pay overtime, unemployment, minimum wage. Shoot whilst we are at it, why not get away with Salaries altogethor.. Hey, minorities having problem being hired.. So be it.. it should be the companies rights to hire whomever right? The government should not play any part..
Extreme examples? Maybe so.. I admit.. or are they? What is the difference? Many of us have said things we wish we could take back in a conversation, and have had the opportunity to explain ourselves.. In Person..
But unfortunately, with the aspect of illegal background/reference Checks.. those done w/o employee permission, somehow that opportunity does get missed.. go figure..
Ah I guess, after attempts to Remember the Value of the American Constitution, I could forget about an opportunity of ever working at Microsoft huh? Wow!! Go figure..
more feedback from tod
posted 7/14/2006 at 4:02 p.m. PT by Recruiting Animal
[Posted verbatim by The Canadian Headhunter]
I think at this point I'll slide over into the "agree to disagree" lane and let you pass me on the left. :)
You obviously have strong opinions on the subject (as do I) and I'm glad that you shared them. Something that didn't get brought up in this post is the flip-side...
jobseekers doing online research of potential employers. Here's an interesting article at TechDirt: http://techdirt.com/articles/20060713/0948251.shtml
Food for thought, eh. :) Really, that's what its all about...
getting people to think for themselves and then discuss it.
One more quick point to make... You state that after your comments you "...could forget about an opportunity of ever working at Microsoft huh?" Quite the contrary!
I have seen several people get hired at Microsoft because they were willing to state their opinions and stand by them.
A good manager will respect someone more for stating their contrarian opinion (in a respectful manner!) than being a yes-man/woman.
Personally, I prefer working with people who think differently than I do because when we come together we end up with ideas and solutions that any one of us individually would never have thought of.
That's one of the amazing aspects of the diversity found at Microsoft and thousands of other companies!
Thanks again to the Canadian Headhunter for posting my comment!
Tod, graciously sent me that email but unfortunately I was out of town until late Monday and was unable to post for him. Tod, I do respectfully agree with you, yes it is because people should have the opportunity to disagree; it is what makes the world go round..
Thanks for your response. Karen
Please log in to post a comment to this blog. New users, please click here.
more ere blogs 3-O’Clock Coffee Break 3rd Rock A to Z of Health Care Recruiting Ali’s Sourcing Techniques Ask The Recruiter Attract, Retain, Repel -- Employment Branding 2007 Attracting Diverse Candidates Attracting the New Workforce Blogging outside the box Contract Recruiting CyberSleuthing! DC Recruiting E-Cruit Blog Fresh Meat Gen Y'd Generational Recruiting Hawaii Recruiting Head Count Hire Calling Interviewing and Selecting the Best Invested, innovative, brilliant: Improving the recruiting experience JobFares Lean Six Sigma Martin Snyder's Passing Scene Military Talent On The BioPharm Online Recruiting…Off the Record Quest For The Best Recruiter's Day Out Recruiting for the Non-Recruiter Recruiting ROI Recruiting Techniques in China Recruitment Rap Recruitment Spin Retention Secrets Sales, Fails, and Tales Search For G-Talents Seattle - A Recruiter's Perspective Second Life Recruitment Senior Care Notes SittingXlegged Social Internet Recruiting Social Media Marketing Solutions to Your Call Reluctance Cash Drain Talent in China Talent Wire The CareerXroads Annex The Gatekeeper The Good Search The Honest Recruiter The Life and Times of a Healthcare Recruiter The New 3 R's: Recruit, Re-Develop & Retain The Recruiter's Edge The Switch Todd Raphael's World of Talent Truth Justice and the American Way of Headhunting Video 2.0 for Recruitment Webcruiting Techniques
NEW! Put fresh ERE content on your website, blog, or corporate intranet.
Get a free ERE badge like the one above on your website in three easy steps today.
A quick little intro for those of you tuning in to the 
