nonprofits & governments programs rejecting staff per social media activities

07-02-2006 4:17 AM

Peace Corps Online, an independent news forum serving Returned Peace Corps Volunteers, is reporting that the Peace Corps pulled an invitation for a candidate for an assignment after officials read an article in which he stated an opinion regarding government policy that they felt could get him, and other volunteers he would serve with, into trouble while on assignment. I want to reiterate that it was not the particular opinion, one way or the other, but that he offered an opinion *at all* about the government in a public forum that caused his invitation to be pulled, given the nature of the work he would be doing and the culture in the specific country he was going to be sent to.

For volunteers: do you think it's appropriate for you to be screened this way? Have you held back from writing a particular something online because of a volunteering activity you are doing or want to do?

For those who represent nonprofit organizations: have you "googled" the names of candidates for your board of directors, or candidates for certain other "high profile" volunteering positions regarding the organization's advocacy, marketing, fund-raising, work with clients, etc., to see what they might have done/said online? Or have you ever checked to see what your younger volunteers might be saying about your organization on MySpace? Have you ever come across information that has made you reconsider a candidate for a position, or lead to your discovering negative information about your organization by a current or former volunteer?

Myself: when working for a nonprofit organization, I have, indeed, typed into Google the name of online volunteering candidates who've made claims I want to check up on ("I was the founder of such-and-such organization" or "I wrote an episode of 'The Simpsons'"). And if an online volunteer has told me he or she has launched a web site or blog, I've always checked it out and, so far, if they have chosen to comment on their volunteering, it's been very positive (had I found something negative, I guess I would have followed my own advice.... As a volunteer, I know that some organizations have screened me online to verify my information. I do post personal opinions to my own web site, on a segregated portion that is obviously not associated with the "professional" part, but I do indeed place limits on myself regarding what I say.

What about you, as a person who chooses volunteers, or, as a volunteer yourself?

Jayne Cravens

I can say that in my experience as a consultant, I not only Google potential clients to see if my goals and integrity match with theirs, but when hiring someone either as a volunteer or an employee, I would definitely Google a person and have done so.

One particular potential client asked to meet with me a few months ago. I had a connection with one of their board members so my confidence was high in getting the assignment.

After Googling the staff that I was to interview with, I saw some pretty horrible posts on one of the decision-maker's blog. This person used personally offensive language to describe her roommates, people living in her apartment complex, bashing particular political officials and using abusive language to describe social policy opinions.

I cancelled my appointment knowing that I could not authentically work with this person nor subject myself to their judgments regarding my job qualifications.

Lou Storiale Storiale Consulting Group, Inc. http://www.storiale.com

As a followup to my original post, and per the latest post, some further questions to prompt discussion:

could you, as a volunteer manager at an organization, work with a volunteer who you found out, per an online check, engaged in personal activities regarding a political stand that you find personally distasteful?
could you, as a volunteer, work with a staff member at an organization who, on his or her personal blog, expressed political or social opinions you found personally distasteful?
for both groups: where do you draw the line in considering a person's personal opinions and activities versus their professional-based opinions and activities?

Jayne Cravens

I personally could work with someone with whom I felt an aversion to their posted politics, if I felt they were someone with whom I could talk.

I enjoy listening to people who've done research in an area that is new to me. I also enjoy engaging in conversation with people who have new information for me to digest.

I would be looking at their politics, not from the point of view of whether or not they were acceptable, but from the point of view of where they came from, and how open this person is to new information, and to the people around him/her.

I would certainly be much more careful if I knew I were interviewing someone with objectionable opinions than someone who mirrored my own.

I have little patience with people who assume they know everything, and that people who disagree with them are to be ignored, or shut out, or even damaged in some way, and I certainly would not want to be one those people.

I personally value diversity, and so have a immediate negative response to what I read here about the Peace Corp Online action. The organization that cannot tolerate some coloring outside their lines are going to be very ingrown eventually.

Still I recognize that it isn't a black and white issue. There is always a trade off between diversity versus the ability to focus on a certain mission.

I think, as Margaret says, that what is most important is the ability to communicate about the issues that are pertinent to the job being done when on the job.

my 2 cents,

Sasha Daucus, www.FundRaiserSoftware.com

Trends in the hiring of paid staff often show up in trends for selecting a volunteer, so in that spirit, I'm passing on the following from workforceonline.com, which relates to the post that started off this thread:

Don't Network Like This: One in four employers use social networking Web sites such as Facebook.com or MySpace.com to screen out applicants based on the information they post there, according to the Daily Illini at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. The article references a new survey conducted by CareerBuilder.com that found that about 63 percent of employers decided against hiring someone after seeing content the person had posted online. Reasons "ranged from a candidate bad-mouthing a previous employer to them posting information about drinking or drugs to their having an unprofessional screen name."

Jayne Cravens

I'm old enough to remember the House UnAmerican Actitivity Committee, in the 60's. A great subject for our high school debating teams (Do they still have those, where students research, and then debate the issues of the day, in front of an audience?)

Anyway, one of the issues that came up most was a discussion of what people had done twenty or thirty years previously, in the 30's,mostly.

Looks like this generation will have the same issues - only this time it will be their adolescent cyberspace postings come back to haunt them.

As an employer, I get way more candidates that I can cross my eyes at, usually in the hundreds. The first cut is always to look for reasons to screen someone out.

Margaret Bartley

I just heard this morning on Public Radio that there are at least two services (no, didn't get the names...) that will help people looking for jobs or otherwise have information they want buried, get the job done.

They either contact the site(s) that has the information and ask them to remove it, or create web content pages what will be found better than the old content, and make the college drinking photos much harder to find.

Christian_SEO

I saw that NPR article -- very informative.

I think that for most online volunteering and tech-related volunteering, a nonprofit organization is probably not going to research the online profile of a candidate, because most volunteering opportunities do not involve a volunteer being a spokesperson for or representative of the organization, working with the organization's clients or the general public, or handling confidential information.

But if you are going for an intensive volunteering experience, like the Peace Corps, or you want a high profile volunteering assignment, like moderating an online discussion group for a nonprofit or being the media contact person, or the opportunity you want might involve clients or the general public, your online activities might be looked into, and what is found could impact whether or not you are chosen for such a volunteering assignment. So think about that before you post that college drinking photo to MySpace.

As for the issue of free speech -- the reality is that some volunteer positions require a person to be seen by clients and the publlic as neutral or apolitical on some issues. So, if you don't feel like you can hold back from firing off a letter to the editor about an issue you hold near and dear, you need to be prepared for certain volunteer positions to be closed to you. I think the situation regarding the Peace Corps that starts this thread is an example of that.

Jayne Cravens

01-04-2007

Continuing this thread...

In November 2006, Workforce Management Online posted an article called " Caution Advised When Using Social Networking Web Sites for Recruiting, Background Checking." The story says that the danger lies in the fact that, "by looking at the highly personal sites, employers can inadvertently learn about matters such as candidates� age, marital status, medical problems and plans to start a family... these topics typically are off limits in job interviews because they can be grounds for discrimination suits if people aren�t hired."

The same hiring rules for paid employees don't apply to "hiring" volunteers, but many volunteer recruiters adhere to these rules anyway, out of a sense of ethics. And that includes not asking volunteer candidates about their age, marital status, etc.

Jayne Cravens

11-26-2008

I want to revive this thread, per a recent CareerBuilder.com survey that says employers are checking job applicants' profiles on sites like Facebook, Brightfuse and LinkedIn. Twenty-two percent of employers say they use social networking sites when evaluating job candidates, and an additional 9 percent intend to do the same soon. What about nonprofits, NGOs, charities, etc. regarding volunteers -- do any of you type a new volunteer applicant's name into Google.com and see what comes up? Have any of you decided *not* to accept an applicant as an a volunteer because of his or her online activities via an online social networking site such as MySpace or FaceBook, or things he or she has said on a blog or web site?

Jayne Cravens

When I was with a different organization, we recruited a number of college students to serve as board members, advisory committee members, and bloggers as they are our prime constituency.

None of the positions were paid though there were other perks (like travel and representing us at events and conferences, etc) that most students were thrilled to do so the positions were considered somewhat prestigious.

I had one student who was a guest blogger for our organizational blog as well as on our student advisory committee who put a profile photo on her Facebook page where she was wearing a t-shirt that said, "I f**ked your dad" that caused quite an uproar. Even though her page was her personal profile, she had our official org blog feed into her page via RSS and held official roles within our organization. We didn't "fire" her so to speak but it did lead to a variety of conversations about appropriately representing the organization externally.

If she hadn't already been involved with us and was applying to be a volunteer, blogger, board member, or intern, I probably would've not called her back after seeing her Facebook profile.

Becky W, Staff Writer for TechSoup

Great example! Thanks SO much for sharing.

I think if she hadn't had your official organization blog feed into her personal page, I *might* not have had an issue. What do others think?

Jayne Cravens

Archived discussion from 2006 & 2008 on nonprofits & governments programs rejecting staff per social media activities

Archived discussion from 2006 & 2008
on nonprofits & governments programs rejecting staff per social media activities