Join the discussion

Latest Posts

Categories

Is it ethical for a recruiter to Google a candidate? I think so.

by Brett Iredale February 10, 2009

It is becoming more and more common for recruiters and HR professionals to Google job candidates, particularly as the candidate moves further along the hiring process.

There have been various articles of late calling into question the validity, legality and ethicality of looking up candidates on Google or social networks such as Linkedin, Facebook or MySpace.

I think this is a perfectly legitimate practice.  Here is my take on it:
  • Everybody in 2009 knows that if you put any information about yourself on a public web site then it can and will be accessible to others
  • Recruiters looking at public information made public by a candidate have every right to do so
  • Recruiters continue to be bound by law to ensure they do not discriminate against a person seeking a job based on race, religion, age and so on.
  • There are (thankfully) still no rules about discriminating against someone for being a tool.  We all do it every day.  An essential part of a recruiter's job is to quickly spot and cull out unsuitable candidates based on a thousand different criteria.  These criteria can include "cultural fit" - i.e. "you appear to be a tool and our client probably won't like you."  
  • Quite frankly if there are photos of you on Facebook being a knuckle then a recruiter has every right to assume you are such and to find a suitable reason not to offer you an interview. 
  • Recruiters are discreet and sage enough to know not to tell a candidate they were rejected because their MySpace page showed them shooting heroin while having a threesome with Thai hookers.  Recruiters have entire handbooks of non contentious reasons for not putting someone forward for a job.
My Summary
Keep your personal, private, embarrassing, incriminating, cringe worthy photos and information OFF the internet and no one can ever use it against you.  Put that information on the internet and, as in life, people will most certainly judge you by it.


Entry filed under: Recruitment, Tips and Tricks

5 CommentsAdd your own

1. Paul February 10, 2009 at 10:11am

Absolutely agree!!

I have been sent two candidates recently, both highly recommended to me, that didn't pass the Google search test.

Bloke #1: simply left off his last role in a very similar company to us where he lasted just 3 months before presumably being given the boot. I Googled his name and found the 'Welcome to our new starter - 'Mr Liar, Dated November 08'. Bullet dodged.

Lady #2: A very creative lady indeed. Her 'agency' resume just didn't stack up for me, so I Googled her name, and found her 'true' resume appearing #3 in Google's search results, sitting on a free industry forum/job board. (It was definitely the same lady by the way).

In the last year and a half this lady has worked for 4 firms - the problem is she revealed just two of them on one resume, and the other two firms on her 'alternate' resume! The rest of the resume was about 90% the same, however she got creative on one of them with her job titles (BDMs became 'Sales Directors', etc).

So from these two experiences I have learn that Googling a candidate's name is an essential part of every recruitment due diligence process ... if you stop at reference checking you may be missing half the story!

2. Michael Specht February 10, 2009 at 5:14pm

Interesting topic.

I Google everyone, if I am going to meet you for the first time, I will have put your name into Google to see what pops out.

But this information needs to be carefully assessed as to whether it will add value to the hiring decision. Just because the candidate has a wall post about being drunk at a party, this should not rule them out of the job unless they are to be a role model and the image does not fit with that undertaking. The same should be said for photo sites such as Flickr, etc. The information needs to be used to improve the quality of hire. Maybe the fact that they go out and have fun means they have a balanced life?

Having said that how do you know that the profile is in fact the person in question? There are limited controls on people creating fake accounts.

Oh and make sure regular reference and background checking processes are still completed!

3. Preema K February 13, 2009 at 9:52am

I think it's absolutely legitimate that Google checks alongside Facebook and LinkedIn are used in conjunction with other candidate credentialling (i.e. reference checks, resume, interviewing). We use Bullhorn so it integrates LinkedIn and Google to a candidates record which is very handy.

As a candidate, if you're going to make this information available to everyone - why wouldn't you? First impression count for a lot and it's importnat for a candidate to have some discretion in terms of what they are making public and ultimately it's their responsibility.

From a recruiter's perspective, it allows you to weed out the bad apples but at the end of the day, I think a diligent and savvy recruiter is going to make a judgement call based on an overall objective assessment of the candidate.

4. Carey Eaton February 16, 2009 at 4:46pm

Looking at someone's publicly available information is not really an ethical dilemma if the information is public and posted there by the candidate themselves.

The real social challenge comes when you've got to actually tell the candidate honestly that you checked them out on the internet without their permission and then describe precisely why it is you're rejecting them.

5. Kelly February 23, 2009 at 4:12pm

I guess it is at what point the ethical turns unethical. In regards to discrimination - when it comes to recruitment it is rife - yes there is legislation however it does not stop people as we all well know! Drink driving is illegal yet does not seem to stop people and that's when human lives are at stake.

People are entitled to use social networks and to share personal information in a social context without having this information used out of context. I guess that the issues arise when this information is used out of context which invariably it does and I suspect this will just grow.

We are just more likely to be judging and discriminating early on in the recruitment process without much basis for it, which I view as a major issue.

Leave a Comment