Hiring Poorly is Worse than Not Hiring

September 16, 2004 by Dane | 1 Comment
In Employees, Posts

Joe Kraus, one of the founders of Excite, says that hiring a bad employee is far worse than not hiring anyone. He explains:

Other than fundraising, nothing I do as an entrepreneur is as important as hiring. But, hiring is tricky because it’s so easy to loosen standards, especially when you’re feeling in a pinch for people. But, I always keep two things in mind when hiring, no matter how desperate I feel.
  1. A bad employee does far more damage than no employee, no matter the issue.
  2. A players hire A players, B players hire C players, and C players hire losers. Let your standards slip once and you’re only two generations away from death.

Related Posts

Comments

  • C.Marie on September 29th, 2004 at 12:18 pm

    I couldn’t agree more! A perfect example is the one in which Washington Mutual Bank hired as a manager a man with a history of crassness and gender harassment. Once hired, Washington Mutual chose to retain him (instead of admitting to a very poor hiring choice) and lose those he harassed. Those employees were all more qualified and experienced with impeccable work records and work ethics. As a result of this company wide practice, as well as so many other poor choices, this once powerful financial institution has become a mere, pathetic shodow of it’s former self.
    One suggestion to those in charge of hiring and firing:
    Take a long look at how many of todays successful entrepreneurs were the former great job performers you chose to cut loose.

Leave a Reply

« Previous Post

Next Post »