Integrity in a Job Search?!

It's ever harder for not-stars to land good, stable employment, so it's tempting to use such deceptions as hiring someone to write your resume and feed you B.S. answers to cover up your weaknesses, employment gaps, etc. 

My PsychologyToday.com article today makes the case that such subterfuge is not only unethical but not pragmatically in your interest.

Are You an Ethical Employee?

Many people think they're more ethical than they in fact are. My USNews.com article today: Are You an Ethical Employee? 

Resume Writers Should Go Extinct

Here is another adaptation from my just-published book, What's the Big Idea? Reinventions for a better America.

This idea is related to my own field: career counseling  After a quarter century in the profession, I have reservations about it. The book presents a reinvention of the profession but here I'll focus just on one aspect:

I believe that career counselors are unethical when they help people with their resume.

I admit to occasionally having done so myself , for example, when it's a client I believe would be excellent in his target job but his work history wouldn't show that. I'm aware that's still somewhat unethical but, like all of us, I'm human.

Here is a 2-minute video of me making that argument Others might prefer just to read the text, so I append an enhanced transcript below.

Here's an enhanced transcript of what I said:

In deciding whom to interview, employers are wise to use resumes not just to see candidates' work history but to compare candidates' ability to think, organize, and clearly present information.

Those are key to so many jobs. (Of course, not truck driver, ditch digger, etc.) So when someone uses someone else to write or even edit their resume, it's of course, unfair to candidates that wrote their own resume.

A resume writer also is unfair to the employer, who used that resume as part of the hiring decision, thus making it more likely the employer will be saddled with a worse employee than s/he otherwise would have hired.

A resume writer also is unfair to the coworkers on that job, who are forced to work with a worse person than if a resume writer didn't commit the subterfuge.

And ultimately, a resume writer is unfair to society, because when the best candidates are not hired, we all suffer worse products and services.

If using a professional to write or even edit a resume were ethical, why do resume writers never credit their work on their clients' resumes?

The suggestion that America would be better if resume writers went extinct is one of  hundreds of ideas in my just-published book, What's the Big Idea?: Reinventions for a better America. I hope you'll check it out on Amazon.

Reinventing Career Counseling

In each WashingtonPost.com column, The Big Idea, I get to propose a disruptive solution to a big problem.

This week, I'm disrupting my own profession. It's on reinventing career counseling.

Perhaps surprising, it's a field that, net, hurts society as much as helps it. I like to think that what I propose fixes that. HERE is the link.

Is Helping a Weak Candidate to Land a Job Ethical?

I just posted this to a forum for career counselors but it has relevance to anyone who has or might try to help a weak candidate land a job.

I'd like to ask a question. America is mired in arguably the toughest job market since The Great Depression. And, worse than in the Great Depression, structural factors in the U.S. suggest that our jobless non-recovery may continue for a long time: job-killing technology innovations are advancing ever more rapidly, ever more jobs are being offshored to countries with intelligent, hard-working workforces willing to work for so much less than are American workers, and without employers forced to pay the ever greater government-mandated costs of and paperwork in hiring an American: on top of Social Security, Workers Comp, SSDI, FMLA, ADA, ever increasing employee lawsuits for wrongful termination, sexual harassment/hostile environment, there's now ObamaCare. And paid leave has just been okayed in Wisconsin. Can the rest of the states be far behind?

Those costs, of course, put additional pressure on employers to not hire, to automate, offshore, etc, and when they must hire Americans, to hire people only for a short-term contract or part-time/unbenefited position. And those costs to employers are likely to rise further. U.S. immigration trends and differential birth rates are such that there will be ever more Democratic-leaning voters and so the pressures to place even more burdens on U.S. employers will likely increase further.

In light of the paucity of jobs and likely exacerbation of that paucity, is it clear that top career counselors like yourselves are performing a net good for society by devoting--as you've reported here--so much knowledge and commitment (even making phone calls to employers on the candidate's behalf) to helping candidates like that person with Asperger's Syndrome so severe no one has hired him during his entire 20 years of adulthood, to beat out a candidate more likely to do a better job? As we're all painfully aware, even mediocre jobs typically get many applicants. The same question could be asked about the efforts you describe to help ex-offenders, who, as you know, have high recidivism rates and personalities and ability/skill deficits more likely to make them, on average, worse employees than are non-offenders.

When you choose to package and advocate for such candidates, is that unfair to the more qualified candidate who can't afford or isn't lucky enough to get an advocate as good as you are?

In addition, might your choosing to package and advocate for such candidates be unfair to the employer who ends up hiring an inferior employee because we the career counselor did such a good job of packaging and promoting our candidate?

And ultimately, might your choosing to package and advocate for such candidates, net, be bad for society? We all suffer when a weak person is hired. For example, think of how we suffer when we get an ineffective customer service rep or a car repairperson who doesn't fix our car or charges us too much, let alone a nurse who can't get the catheter in right or makes a more serious mistake---over 100,000 Americans die every year because of medical errors.

In an economy in which there are plenty of jobs to go around, that is less of an ethical problem. But in our economy, even mediocre jobs are difficult to obtain even when a candidate is fully competent and without major personality issues, let alone when the candidate suffers from something like the severe Asperger's Syndrome that afflicts the person you described. Even in the SEO job you suggested--his condition will--as implied in your comments--likely make this person a net worse employee than the employer could otherwise find without undue difficulty.

In light of all that, would we be wise to ask ourselves whether our efforts to package and promote job candidates would do greater good if focused not on the people with the greatest deficits but on the people who--in a well-suited job--are more likely to be good employees?

Update: The response from the career counseling group's members? Nearly universal opprobrium.