Working Wounded: Reviewing Your Peers

June 30, 2006 — -- READERS: Recently, I received an e-mail from a reader about peer interviews. This is when employees who would have to work with the job candidate get involved in the interview process. I've always thought of peer interviewing as a positive way to give the rest of the team a chance to "kick the tires" of a potential employee.

But this reader raises questions that I've never considered about the practice. I'd love to hear your thoughts on his comments.

Here's a look at the e-mail:

Dear WORKING WOUNDED: "I have grave concerns about a new practice in my workplace -- peer interviewing. I have no training in interviewing a person for a job, having always been the interviewee. What is your understanding of the motivation of employers to call rank-and-file staff into a room where a job applicant is being interviewed, the ostensible purpose being the rank-and-file can each ask a question of this applicant?

"I am convinced employers get information surreptitiously through the free-rein peer interview process from questions that would be illegal for the employers themselves to ask. For example, my friend was in a break room in her current workplace. Peers there questioned her about where her children attended school. She did not say that any of these peers' supervisors were also in the room. My friend thought these questions were asked to allow her (future) co-workers to get a feel for how it would be to share the confines of a workplace 40 hours a week, to discern her social fit in the workplace.

"Logical, yes … but, as I have been severely disciplined in my workplace as a result of the misappropriation of administrative rules my employer allowed chosen employees to exercise, I see extraordinary danger, litigiously speaking, in having untrained, self-interested and pack-mentality rank-and-file being allowed to confront a prospective employee.

"What if the applicant is remarkably attractive or keenly intelligent, and these traits set the peers' nerves on edge? The possibility is strong that peers interviewing a person in possession of outstanding personal qualities might exert their juvenile selves and claim there is 'just something about the person they don't like.' These opinions could be taken into serious consideration by unenlightened supervisors, and the insecurities of the peers could prevent a suitable person from getting the position.

"If such were the case, you might say, 'Well, if the peers felt that way about him or her and the boss listened and took these peers seriously, that shows this highly qualified applicant would have been a poor fit, so it is probably for the best.' I strenuously disagree. A situation where untrained rank-and-file can, by whim, determine the hiring practices of an organization is a situation where the pack will be at some point, saying, 'Don't hire him/her! She / he's too… white, black, Chinese, pockmarked, etc.'

"Do you know from where the idea of peer interviewing arose? I see this as a dangerous and inappropriate practice, and in the stress of my extreme reaction, I might jeopardize my employment."

The e-mail is passionate, and very interesting. It's different from my take on peer interviews, and I wonder what other think.

We'd like to hear your thoughts about peer interviews. I'll give an autographed copy of "Working Wounded: Advice that adds insight to injury" (Warner, 2000) to the best submission. Send your entry, name and address via: http://workingwounded.com or via e-mail: bob@workingwounded.com. Entries must be received by Wednesday, July 5.

Here are the results from a recent workingwounded.com/ABCNews.com online ballot:

Which best describes the buy-in level where you work?

• Bought in, 15.7 percent
• Weighing their options, 31.5 percent
• You're joking, right? 52.6 percent

Our winning strategy for increasing buy in comes from S.V. in Vancouver, Canada:

"I once had a guy on my team who was disruptive and difficult to deal with. How did I get him to buy in? I made him chairman of the committee. Once he was in charge his energy turned totally constructive. I'm not sure this is the solution every time there is a problem with people's commitment, but it sure worked for me."

Assimilation, or not…Most believe their company doesn't do a good job of bringing on new talent

• Executives who believe their company is average at bringing new talent onboard: 38 percent
• Executives who believe their company is below average: 22 percent
• Executives who believe their company does a poor job: 10 percent

From: Korn/Ferry

Bob Rosner is a best-selling author, speaker and internationally syndicated columnist. His newest best-seller, "Gray Matters: The Workplace Survival Guide" (Wiley, 2004), is a business comic book that trades cynicism for solutions. Ask Bob a question: bob@workingwounded.com or http://graymattersbook.com.

This work is the opinion of the columnist and in no way reflects the opinion of ABC News.