
How do I avoid hiring assholes at my company? - myth_drannon
http://michaelrwolfe.com/2013/10/20/how-do-i-avoid-hiring-a-holes-at-my-company/
======
sklivvz1971
Following that advice will create a bland company of mediocre people. But hey,
no a-holes! </sarcasm> :-)

To me the evidence to how misguided this advice is, is that the author first
assumes people _are_ assholes (so it's a quality of the person), but in the
last section they assume that it is useful to give "stern feedback" so people
can correct their behavior... so people _behave_ as assholes and are free to
change if they choose.

Which brings me to the other point. What if these people _were_ the most
important contributors in the past jobs? What if theirs skills _are_ more
important than the rest? Should they describe themselves as simply "part of a
team"? That would be completely hypocritical.

Equally, all the markers they give are completely unqualified by ifs and
caveats, and as such are very misguided.

Here's how you don't hire an asshole. imo:

* You use your own empathy to understand if you can work with this person, if they fit culturally

* You look for lack of empathy in the candidate because that's the sure sign of a person that will break your culture eventually

(I would not hire someone with a similar blog post)

~~~
redbad
I don't mean this glibly, but just in case you aren't playing devil's
advocate: you sound like an asshole, and I would not hire someone who made a
comment like this one. ($0.02 and all.)

~~~
GuiA
Oh god, really? Is that what we have now- people on HN telling each other
"you're an asshole i won't hire you" "no you're an asshole I won't hire you"?

Come on guys.

------
blisterpeanuts
Isn't this just a vulgar, shallow rephrasing of solid, old-fashioned
management principles that have been around forever?

Everyone knows that there are difficult personalities out there. You have to
look at what every candidate brings to the table: skills, experience,
creativity, communication, etc. It's usually a mixed bag.

Some people are brilliantly creative but very difficult to get along with in
an office environment, and others are extremely smooth and diplomatic but
unproductive. I've run into both kinds, though most people tend to be
somewhere in between.

For a start-up situation, it seems to me you want to hire more from networking
than from cold-call applications. When a new hire is 25% of the work force, he
or she is going to have a huge impact on the culture and productivity of the
team and it's very helpful to have met and interacted with them already.

When a new hire is 1/1000 of the work force, they're going to have less of an
impact unless they're C-level, so you can afford to cold-hire based on
established procedures.

I don't see much value in statements like "A-holes usually are not very
introspective". It seems this person has a very specific image of what an
undesirable team member would be like, probably based on his own brief
experience in the working world.

After a couple of decades of working experience, I find it hard to generalize
what an "a-hole" would be. It's all over the spectrum, from good hard working
team players to borderline or sociopathic personalities whom you feel like
strangling.

I guess the bottom line is, leave your ego at the door while interviewing, try
to see the value in each person, figure out what they bring to the table, and
maybe get them in for a day or two to interact with the team and see if the
chemistry is OK.

~~~
eternalban
I agree with you. OP may "introspect" on the fact that like attracts like.

------
dfraser992
Based on this, I'm an a-hole. I did 90% of the IT work for this last client
because I was 90% of the IT department. I literally begged upper management
for help at one point. I kept pushing to give this part time contractor in
Russia more work because he did great work, but his management stopped
responding to emails because, as it turns out, they were tired of getting
stiffed on payment.

Eventually I wised up and quit, but in an interview, how do you explain such a
situation where you did most of the work for 4 years without looking like a
braggart or an idiot? Things have changed so much in the past 5 years and I'm
afraid I'm obsolete already because this client was clueless and ignored every
suggestion on how to use the latest tech or do things the right way.

The best way to detect the a-holes is to try to gauge their integrity from the
start. We did hire someone at the beginning to build the front end while I
built the back, but after 6 months of constant yammering about marketing
related issues and constant "I'm almost dones", the kid bailed and said he
couldn't do any more because his full time job was too busy. He then handed me
a pile of half finished ^$&^^&!!. Then I figured out he had been giving access
to the codebase to some Russian he'd hired to do his work for him...

So if someone is sort of arrogant... you have to expect that of 20-something
young men overly enamored of their intelligence. But if they at least care
primarily about the project, and not themselves, then they have a work ethic
and that's what you want for your team. A-holes, liars, fools - none of them
have a work ethic.

~~~
insickness
Even if your previous employer was utter shit, there's almost no way to talk
badly about them without sounding like an asshole. In that situation, your
best bet is to spin it in a positive light. Leave in the fact that you did 90%
of the work but refrain from talking about how bad management was. Talking bad
about the previous management does not help you in any way. Even if you left
the job because of it, you're better off saying you left "to learn new
technologies or whatever, rather than saying it was bad management. Saying it
was bad management leaves the possibility open that _you_ could have been the
problem. So rather than take a risk on you, an employer may choose to go with
someone who says they worked well with everyone at their previous company.

~~~
dfraser992
Yeah, I know. Even though there were 3 people in the company, including me,
and I managed myself... It was a brute force lesson in office politics, it
seems. At least I've graduated from the Clueless level now.

This code of omerta in the business world allows the unscrupulous to thrive.
The person who introduced me to the CEO finally told me some stories about
when they had been a co-worker with them, that if I'd been told from the
outset, I'd never have gone to work for the CEO or at least would have had a
lawyer on speed dial. But my friend had the same "don't speak bad about
people" theory.. Interviews require following a different script. But the
Internet has different rules... See my forthcoming blog.

Gossip does play an important role in communities; it is a back channel for
info that social niceties or conventions prevent from being disseminated. But
it is an unreliable channel too, hence the connotations about "gossip". Bottom
line, I did not do the due diligence I should have, and ignored the warning
signs I was picking up about how unethical the people I was working for were.
So I see my responsibility clearly. I only offer up my story for others to use
as observational learning.

~~~
insickness
Sorry for the late response. To clarify, I meant that you shouldn't talk bad
about your employer at an interview. If you're starting a blog, you may want
to consider writing it under a pseudonym--at least if you do plan to ever try
to get employed by another person or company. Employers almost always Google
prospective employees these days and online criticism of an employer would
probably be ten times worse than speaking bad about that previous employer at
an interview. I know people in this situation and it's not good.

And yes, I agree, finding out about previous employers is great. Check out
Glassdoor.com. It's not perfect, but it's pretty good for what it is.

------
DanielBMarkham
Yeah, this ain't so good.

First, "asshole" and "people who don't collaborate well" are not the same.
"Assholes" are people who piss other people off. "People who don't collaborate
well" can be any number of things. Mostly shy folks, in my experience.

Second, pissing people off isn't that bad of a trait -- as long as you are a
friendly person and mean well. People will forgive a plethora of communication
faults if you put their interests first and genuinely care about them. So what
you're really wanting to avoid is "selfish assholes"

Finally, there's a tremendous danger in avoiding conflict in companies.
Healthy conflict is a good thing, and over time we tend to want to hire people
that mostly agree with us and are always on our side. This is a terrible thing
to have, because it limits your creative potential. Give me a mixed team of
radically different personality types and political leanings, all willing to
push and be gruff with each other, yet all in good sport. We call this
"passionate opinions, lightly held"

So no, the goal here isn't just to identify douchebags and keep them from the
room. The goal is to maximize the mental diversity while maintaining civility
and a family-like atmosphere. Much tougher.

~~~
michaelrwolfe1
I agree with you.

"Don't collaborate well" was poor writing on my part - I'm talking about a
specific type of poor collaboration, including undermining and attacking co-
workers. I clarified in the post. There are other kinds of poor collaboration
skills that have nothing to do with assholeness.

Pissing people off and conflict are fine in the course of honest and healthy
debate to get to the right answers. Good companies encourage that.

Assholes actively undermine healthy conflict by 1) cutting off debate so that
their ideas win, and 2) resorting to personal attacks. This leads to an
"unsafe" environment where people don't want to speak up.

Unfortunately the boss is often the asshole, which creates an environment
where people just keep their mouths shut since speaking up is not worth the
trouble.

------
3minus1
> Ask about the skills they admire and the skills they wish they had more of.
> A–holes usually are not very introspective

I hate when amateurs try to psychoanalyze other people, or put any sort of
faith in their theories. Reading people is hard.

------
joezydeco
_Most people who work in tech end up working with some of the same people over
and over again, and they bring each other into their companies._

Oh GOD that's a huge red flag for me. Because that clique will always have
priority over your needs and career track. Not all of those people are brought
with because they were super-competent and worked in complete psychic harmony
with their peers. Sometimes people just need a parachute out of whatever
company they were struggling in.

~~~
michaelrwolfe1
Nepotisms and cliques are not good, and I'm not defending them - you should
never recommend someone into a company unless you think they kick ass, and if
you are a founder you should work very hard to keep the number of people who
have worked together to a minority, otherwise the new folks will feel like
outsiders.

But it certainly is the case that the kind of people you want to hire are the
kind where anyone who has worked with that person would say, "I'd love to work
with them again."

------
jzwinck
There are really just two parts of this that work reliably and they are
sufficient on their own:

* Listen carefully for badmouthing of previous jobs and co-workers. With a–holes, you will hear a lot of answers that amount to “everyone was stupid but me,” “no one wanted to hear the truth,” etc.

* And, if you do happen to hire an a–hole, act immediately.

It can be that simple: trust your instincts when hiring, and ask people to
leave if they turn out not to be a good fit. Keeping them on board is a waste
of their time too.

~~~
yitchelle
"Trusting your instincts" is a double edge sword.

I don't consider myself to have an extensive experience with a broad range of
people. So trusting my instincts would not have been a good measuring stick
whether I am interviewing an a-hole or a team-player.

------
darkchasma
Okay, this is stupid. I currently work on a team where I do all the
development. We have another developer that really shouldn't be a developer,
by because of unions and such, we can't get rid of him. I try to work with him
as much as possible, but in two years, he hasn't produced any code that could
possibly go into production. But he has a great attitude, and can at the very
least be the cover off I need for vacation.

So, maybe I am an asshole, but I find it hard to use the term "we developed
this", or "we wrote this" when he's effectively written none of the code. So
in order to conform to the criteria set out here, I would be lying, and I also
wouldn't be a passionate developer who cares about my contribution. So sure,
you don't get assholes. But I'd rather have an asshole than an liar.

------
znowi
Would it be so vulgar and inappropriate to spell out "asshole" in the title? I
find this "a-hole" masquerade just silly.

~~~
l0gicpath
Some consider it profanity. It doesn't bother me reading a post with a few s'
or f' words. I myself tend when the point I'm making calls for it to write a
few.

However, some really go over the top and it becomes irritating to read either
both ways whether it's spelled out or masqueraded. So I guess it's a personal
preference.

------
3minus1
> “everyone was stupid but me,” “no one wanted to hear the truth,” etc.

I feel bad now. Even though I would never talk like this I can't help but feel
this way sometimes at my current job. I feel like I am genuinely asked to do
retarded shit sometimes, and no one else seems to mind.

~~~
InTheSwiss
That doesn't mean you are an asshole. I could be the smartest (I don't think
calling people stupid is a good way of putting it) person in the
company/department and you could be in a position that requires you to do
pointless stuff that your skill level is much higher than.

I would suggest that if you feel this way for more than a couple of months
then perhaps you should look at finding another place to work. Being smart
doesn't make you an asshole. Just don't bad mouth your previous colleagues.

If someone I interview is to say that they "grew beyond the technical
capabilities of the role and the company was unable to support further growth
of my skill set due to the direction the business was going" then I am cool
with that. It happens. Hell it SHOULD happen. You should out grow your old
position if you want to move up. It is all in the way you not only say it but
how you BELIEVE it too. If you just say something like the sentence I wrote
above but really believe that you are some "rock star" and everyone else is an
idiot then I am probably gonna pick up on it even if you phrase it in a nicer
way.

~~~
3minus1
Wow, I like this a lot thanks. Something to add to my "file"

------
gaius
I'd be more concerned working for an organization where "a-hole" is the norm.
Either say asshole, or use a different term altogether. Similarly, n-word and
f-bomb.

~~~
khuey
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnKLxDlFS5c](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnKLxDlFS5c)

------
ghostdiver
Real assholes, those who are truly dangerous for coworkers would pass
interview and get accepted by the author at any time. Such people are smart
enough to not badmouth their former employers or coworkers.

Closing note is most important: act immediately and give feedback. Employers
usually don't do that, because it would hurt their image of successful
interviewer.

------
aviraldg
"a–hole"s aren't always bad - there are indeed roles where bold, opinionated
leaders work better

Jobs was an a–hole.

~~~
l0gicpath
Everyone's an asshole to someone at some point about some thing. It's simply a
matter of perception and unmet expectations.

You expect something from someone for which ever your reason might be and what
ever their relationship to you could be. That expectation is unmet and you'll
most likely think of them as assholes.

------
TheSmoke
it seems he has forgotten the first rule.

don't be a fucking asshole boss in the first place.

------
alan_cx
Well, to start with, go look in a mirror and fire the first person you see.

What is an asshole any way? Difficult to get on with? Racist? Right wing nut
job? Religious myth believer? Loner? What?

All I know is that some of the best skilled and most productive people I have
worked with have between called some thing similar by others. Well, screw
them. If they have time to be slagging off skilled and productive workers for
not coming up to their social standards, they sure as hell aren't being of any
use to me.

I think all you can do is test the skill set and take some decent amount of
time to try to get to know the candidate. Then simply go with your guts. Plus,
be prepared to fire the person if it turns out you are wrong. I trial period
is always a good safety net, for both.

BTW, how do you avoid working for an asshole? Much harder.

------
altero
A-hole adds diversity to a team :-)

Often one is a-hole because he insist on basic principles, such as unit tests.

------
michaelrwolfe1
Hey guys, author here. I just re-read this post (it was originally from a
Quora thread a couple of years back) and realized that it is not my best. I
didn't take the time to discuss my definition of "asshole" nor took the time
to do the topic justice since it requires more than a few bullet points ("The
No Asshole Rule" devoted an entire book to the topic)! I will make some mods
to flesh it out.

I have also discovered that the downside of writing about assholes in the
workplace is that criticisms of the piece usually end with the commenter
calling you an asshole.

------
voidr
I think I would prefer to work with "assholes"-only if they could get the job
done, because a lot of these non-"assholes" are only good at bullshitting
their way out of responsibility.

I would prefer to have a person say to my face that he thinks I'm an idiot
than to have one being nice to me and stab me in the back.

How social a person is one thing, how good a person is is totally different.

Relevant video:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elrnAl6ygeM](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elrnAl6ygeM)

------
rmcfeeley
Simple. Take them out to dinner and see how they treat the servers

------
seivan
I am one of those assholes.

------
anonymousexcn
Redundant information. I already knew I was an asshole.

#winning

------
static_typed
Hiring primer:

1\. Hire based on ability, experience, and if the candidate has a good
attitude and approach. 2\. Hire based on company and team fit - this does not
mean six of the exact same profile (i.e 3.25 years J2SE developer from a tech
background), but instead look to build a well-rounded team with a variety of
backgrounds and approaches to tackling the project. But they should all be
able to sing the same song, even if in different keys, it is no good where
each sings a good but unique and competing song. 3\. Do not discriminate,
especially in a so-called "positive" way. It is just bad policy. 4\. If you
say your company will provide training, make sure you do. 5\. Avoid bell-curve
based staff evaluation schemes. 6\. No point number six, the first five should
be enough!

------
Sssnake
I have never gotten any useful information from references ever. A lot of them
are afraid to say anything substantial and just confirm "yes, so and so worked
for us", at best you get a vague "they did their job well". I stopped checking
references completely because it was entirely a waste of time.

~~~
alan_cx
I think employment references are weird anyway.

What an employer is doing is asking for something written by some one they
have likely never met, and taking that as some how equally or more valid than
the person sitting in front of them in interview. Prospective employers have
no idea what context a reference is written in, they cant even judge tone of
voice or body language. They cant ask questions or anything. Its completely
blind faith. The candidate can be questioned, tested and generally judged.

