Agree, gov’t a is different beast. That is not about being productive. It’s about warming a seat. It punishes people who “stand out”.

Here’s the thing – if you want to be “fair”, it starts with the company culture. Fair is not the same as equal.

I recall I had a standardized interview for a public sector job. 3 person panel. 2 people loved me, the other did not.

And he had good reason; I was not an ideal fit for one aspect of the job. They offered me the position, but I declined; I told them it would be disrespectful to that person if I was hired over his objections, and they shouldn’t minimize his concerns.

I wasn’t selling myself short, but rather having integrity in my process – I wasn’t going to work with resentful people day one; life is too short. Needless to say, they were surprised. Later, they had the guy contact me and apologize and ask me to reconsider! Poor guy got browbeat into it. I felt bad for him, because he was doing his job properly, but pushed to conform.

It’s not hard to follow the law while still showing that you’re not engaging in illegal discrimination. These companies are guilty of lazy thinking.

Even in the corp world, employment laws bind the hands of employers. I think one can operate legally and fairly in soliciting applicants and in interviewing them. But when it comes to hiring the best, there’s simply no choice but to do it right. Follow the rules, but use them to your advantage.

I’ll tell you a quick story. I was hired by a federal govt agency a few years ago to do a workshop for its employees. The operation was being closed and they wanted to help people who were being let go. So I did it. To my surprise, a group of HR managers ushered me into a conference room. They wanted to know how they could be more “selective” about who they hired while still respecting the “fairness” rules they had to live under. They were very frustrated, because they were often forced by policy to hire mediocre candidates. How could they get around that? I suggested that they establish more detailed criteria that really reflected what they wanted to accomplish. Use the system against itself. I’m not sure what came out of it, but what was interesting is that there was an internal realization that the policies undermined good hiring.

Go figure.