Ethical conflicts are like the TARDIS (Robert's Rule #7)

[Tweeted 2011-05-03]

One of the things that system theory gives us is a self-reinforcing loop. Granted, systems theory isn't the only thing that contains this concept; however, its centrality to systems theory is significant.


One of the fables that I have enjoyed over the years goes a little something like this.... Once upon a time a thief was being pursued by the authorities. In his haste to evade capture, he dashed into a temple and donned the robes of a holy man. The authorities entered the temple to find a man in the robes of a holy man and asked if he had seen the thief they were pursuing. He assured them he had not. However, in order to continue to evade capture he had to continue to play the role of the holy man. After many years, a severe drought fell upon the land and the ancient scriptures said only the sacrifice of a holy man could end the drought. In his final act in the role of the holy man, the thief sacrificed himself. As he lay dying, rain began to fall.


We all know examples of little actions that grow into larger, more important actions. The most common example of this is deception. To maintain deception ever larger deceptions are required; they are the ultimate pyramid scheme. This is why most advisers caution against something even as small as padding your resume.


Once, while interviewing candidates for my employer, I was given the task of assessing technical abilities in web languages. All candidates had been pre-screened by telephone and resumes had been reviewed, so by the time the candidates arrived, we were confident in presenting several problems so that we could observe and assess their abilities. I should say that I find this task pretty meaningless in many cases. With the advent of online resources and the tendency of the development community to share resources and experiences, a few minutes of searching can answer most questions. Because of this, I also tend to be very lenient in my assessments and somewhat laid-back in approach.


However, in one instance, I presented the problem (in written form) and the candidate immediately handed the problem back to me saying "I can't do this". After 10 minutes of me encouraging him to attempt an answer, even if he was not confident of the result, he continued to refuse.


I have to add here that one thing we don't tell candidates is that if we believe that they are not qualified for the position they are seeking they may still be qualified for other positions in the company, and we may adjust the interview to determine if they are a fit for a different position.


The candidate I was interviewing was likely qualified for a different position; however, it was plain to see that he had been deceptive with his resume and during the pre-screen. It was a small thing, really, to say "yes, I can do that" when really he couldn't. The problem was that saying "yes, I can do that" when he clearly knew that he couldn't, blocked him from progressing further with that employer. Completely.


Simple, but difficult, especially when there's so much on the line. Now he's just one more example that helps me keep in mind Robert's Rule #7 -- the first ethical conflict is usually so small it appears minor and so large it becomes a major career factor, and the candidate will continue to work for small start-ups, never really progressing to the next level.