Social media is an inseparable part of our lives, influencing how we connect, communicate, and even conduct business. Recruiters increasingly use social media to source and recruit candidates, and many use it to research candidates to make or support hiring decisions. This practice, however, is controversial as it raises significant practical and ethical considerations.
The Public vs. Private Dilemma
One of the primary arguments in favor of reviewing candidates’ social media is that the information is publicly available. In an era where individuals share significant aspects of their lives online, it can be argued that anything posted on social media is fair game. Candidates, aware of the public nature of their posts, might be seen as having waived any expectation of privacy. This viewpoint suggests that if candidates do not want certain information to be considered, they should refrain from posting it online.
However, this perspective fails to consider the inherent human desire to separate personal and professional lives. Just as employees enjoy the right to keep their personal lives distinct from their professional personas, candidates should arguably be afforded the same privilege. This distinction is particularly pertinent when considering platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and X, which are often used for personal expression rather than professional networking. In contrast, LinkedIn, designed explicitly for professional interactions, is more justifiably scrutinized during the hiring process.
Diagnostic vs. Biasing Information
The most critical aspect of this debate centers on the distinction between diagnostic and biasing information. Social media profiles can indeed offer valuable diagnostic insights that might support hiring decisions. For instance, a candidate who frequently engages in negative or toxic online behavior may reveal a problematic interpersonal style. Conversely, a candidate who consistently posts about social justice issues might demonstrate strong values and a commitment to advocacy, traits that could be beneficial in certain roles.
However, social media profiles are also rife with biasing information—details that are irrelevant to job performance and potentially discriminatory. Examples include a candidate’s sexual orientation, personal hobbies, or even their social activities. For instance, an individual who enjoys partying on weekends might be unfairly judged as irresponsible, despite being a diligent worker who simply unwinds in their free time. This bias can lead to unjust and illegal discrimination in hiring practices.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
From a legal standpoint, the use of social media in hiring can be a minefield. Various regulations and guidelines emphasize the importance of non-discriminatory hiring practices. For instance, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the United States prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or genetic information. Reviewing social media profiles could inadvertently expose recruiters to such protected characteristics, leading to biased decisions, whether consciously or unconsciously.
Research and litigation further illustrate the risks. In a notable case, the city of Bozeman, Montana, faced backlash and legal scrutiny for asking job applicants to provide their social media usernames and passwords. The policy was quickly abandoned due to privacy concerns and potential violations of federal law. Additionally, a CareerBuilder survey revealed that 70% of employers use social media to screen candidates, yet 54% found content that led them not to hire a candidate. This statistic underscores the prevalence of bias in social media screening.
Recommendations
Given these complexities, my recommendation is to avoid relying heavily on candidates’ social media profiles for hiring decisions. The potential for bias and legal pitfalls is substantial, and most hiring managers are not equipped to accurately differentiate between diagnostic and biasing information.
However, if social media screening is deemed necessary, it should be approached with caution. Organizations should establish clear guidelines and training for recruiters to ensure they focus on job-relevant information. It’s also crucial to regularly audit these practices to identify and mitigate any biases that may arise.
For example, if a recruiter notices a candidate’s frequent engagement in community service activities on LinkedIn, this might be seen as a positive indicator of the candidate’s values and commitment to social causes, relevant to roles requiring strong community engagement. Conversely, encountering photos of the candidate’s personal life on Instagram should be deemed irrelevant to their professional capabilities.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while social media can provide glimpses into a candidate’s personality and values, it also poses significant risks for bias and legal complications. As we navigate the digital age, it is imperative to maintain ethical standards and focus on what truly matters in hiring—candidates’ professional qualifications and potential job performance. By doing so, we can ensure a fair and effective recruitment process that benefits both employers and candidates.
Shiran Danoch, Ph.D., is the CEO and founder of Informed Decisions Interview Intelligence focused on debiasing interviews with actionable feedback powered by AI. She is an IO psychologist with expertise in employee selection and a Ph.D. in people analytics. Shiran is highly passionate about creating work environments where people decisions are made based on data. Shiran has consulted multinational companies and built assessment processes for the Israeli government and army.
The post <strong>Reviewing Candidates’ Social Media Accounts—Legit or Not?</strong> appeared first on HR Daily Advisor.