Bad Faith

I recently worked with a candidate who I believe acted in bad faith toward me and my client.

The candidate received an offer. The offer included a fair deadline, as all offers should.

At this point, the candidate sought my counsel on extending the deadline. It seemed that she had three final round interviews with other companies- on the other coast- scheduled for the week after her offer would expire.

She confided that believed she would receive at least one offer out of three final round interviews, but she told me that she was unlikely to accept any of the competitive offers, because she was geographically tied to the location of my client's offer. She shared the the competitive offers were likely to be for more money, but she could not see accepting them because of her geographic constraints. In fact, in past conversations with me, she had asked not to be referred for roles outside of the metro area of my client.

I advised her that my client had a suitable backup candidate. The client preferred her, but didn't want to lose her and a highly qualified runner-up.

I advised her that because my client wanted her, the client had maxed out the compensation permitted for her seniority band, and would be unable to renegotiate even if she got a competitive offer.

I asked her to consider if this was the right job for her. If she had a reservation, I asked to know it. If she did not, she had their best offer in hand, and it did not make sense to jeopardize it to collect a few more offers that she would have to decline anyway.

A few hours later, she called me to say that the position with my client was the right one for her career development, she had no reservations, and was excited to accept. She thanked me for counsel, and told me that she was confident she had made the right decision.

On the Monday morning following her week of interviews on the other coast, she called my client to "rescind" her acceptance.

She never had the decency to reach out to me again.

I believe that she decided that she was going to go to the week of other interviews, that she lied to me about her geographic preference to lend credibility to her interest in my client, and that she believed that the only way to keep my client's offer on the table was to disingenuously accept it.

I won't be working with this candidate ever again, and I told her so.

A client dodged a bullet

Here's how the process is supposed to go:

1. Client needs to fill a position.
2. Client consults with its recruiting partner to ensure that the target candidate is attainable, the job spec is compelling to target candidates, and the compensation is in line with the pool of target candidates.
3. Client retains recruiter
4. Recruiter submits candidates
5. Candidates are interviewed
6. Client presents an offer
7. Candidate accepts.
8. Everyone lives happily ever after

The key word in that introduction is "supposed." The fairy tale ending above can be derailed- even if everyone involved is acting in good faith

Some time after a candidate began interviewing for the role, a new CEO was hired. The CEO's first order of business was developing a strategic plan which necessitated a reorganization of the company. While the C-suite was busy developing the reorg blueprint was only available on a need to know basis.

As a result, neither the hiring manager nor the HR leader was aware that they were about to issue an offer to a candidate for a role that would be substantively changed as part of the reorg, which would be announced after the offer was issued, and before it was accepted.

To make matters worse, by the time the oversight was discovered, the candidate had declined another offer, to accept this one.

This story got it's happily ever after. The client was able to craft a role that gave the candidate the professional challenge and career development runway which he sought. The offer was accepted.

But the client dodged the bullet of potential liability to the candidate.

It's hard to see where the obvious solution to this problem lies. Should massive organizations freeze all hiring- even high priority strategic roles- in the run up to a reorg? How would you advise this or other clients to avoid this liability in the future?

Offers without deadline

I recently had a conversation on twitter with some recruiting gurus (@animal, @MaureenSharib, and @MeghanMBiro) about offer deadlines.

After several efforts to quantify my thoughts in less than 140 characters, I gave up and decided a blog post was in order.

This is far from a comprehensive list, but here are the top reasons I believe offers must have a REASONABLE expiration date.

Candidates can react to an offer 3 ways: Accept, Decline, or counter-offer.

Giving a candidate unlimited time does not increase the likelihood of acceptance. Forcing the candidate decide in a reasonable time period is unlikely to cost you. Candidates who are unable to say yes on the merits of your offer, are unlikely to say yes with a competitive offer in hand.

But unlimited time DOES increase the likelihood of both less desirable outcomes, decline and counter-offer. Candidates may decline to accept a competitive offer that only materialized after your decision date would have expired, or to counter on the basis of a competitive offer, igniting a bidding war, an overpaid candidate, and in many cases, an employee who cannot justify his or her cost, and is set up to fail.

Finally, while you wait for your first choice to make an open ended decision, you are likely to lose a qualified candidate who would have been your second choice.

Obviously, you aren't making offers to unqualified candidates. But what if two qualified candidates reach the finish line at once? While your top candidate is making a decision, your second place candidate is both feeling unloved by your company, and pursuing other opportunities. If your top choice declines after a lengthy decision period, you have likely lost a viable second choice, and start the search from scratch.

------------------------
Disclaimer time: One day notice is not a REASONABLE deadline. You can keep a backup candidate warm via reference checks or an expectation of a longer decision process for 7-14 days.