"I have seen monkey s**t fights at the zoo more organized than this"...Sorry for the expletive, but everyone at some point has felt the exact same way! I recently conducted an employment search for a key department head position and, although it was completely within my authority to interview and hire unilaterally, felt like it would be "career correct" to involve the volunteer Board of Directors in this decision. I determined the experience and expertise required and posted a job description, fielding at least 150 resumes. After culling through them all, I presented my top two to the Board. I knew who I wanted all along and tried to lead them in that direction with a strong second candidate as my "back up" plan. Three is a crowd so two is the perfect number for final interviews. But during the resume review, the Board leaned toward a different applicant completely. Let the s**t show begin!
The Board heard that the adult son of a Member applied for the position. I did not present his resume to them as one of my two finalists despite quite a bit of lobbying for the position through members who visited my office, emphatic that he should be a top candidate. I, however, did not feel this way. I felt this would be a conflict of interest issue and a persistent source of ongoing scrutiny from other Members. I mean the guys dad drives his cart right up to the edge of every green, cheats on his handicap and his son was going to have to police this? What could possibly go wrong? But I was pressured to add him to the mix by the Board who said words I still hear so clearly to this day "at least we can tell his parents we considered him and interviewed him". So I included the members son, making three finalists, figuring he would be "tossed" right away with the Board recognizing the conflict. Particularly with two other strong candidate choices.
My choice interviewed first and did an amazing job and the Board was impressed and I was confident that they would go with that recommendation. The second candidate was less impressive, good on paper, but suboptimal compared to the first. The final candidate interviewed was the son of the Club Member. Yes, he was qualified and experienced, but he was only there due to the lobbying effort. At the conclusion of the interview, the Board felt that defending a conflict of interest was a favorable trade off against being on the wrong side of the lobby effort if he wasn't chosen. Furthermore, one of the Board Members was the next door neighbor to the candidates parents and didn't want discord there. So, the Board decided that the Members son was who they would back...and then looked at me and said, "it's still your decision". Who did I end up offering the position to? Rule #1 of survival is to not go against your Board. And so that's how a perfect storm of good intentions, poorly written policy, and influence turns into a s**t show and leads to the hiring of the least desirable candidate.
I have two takes from this: 1) when you have the absolute power to make an impact of great importance...and you are DEAD CERTAIN, TAKE IT! Don't bring in the "peanut gallery" to see if they will approve. Tell them what you are going to do and then do it. 2) review your conflict of interest policy and make sure it is broad enough to address all plausible situations. In this case the COI policy for the Board was too boilerplate.
Let me know your thoughts or if you have any questions about conflicts or how to handle sensitive issues between Management and the Board.
Comments