# Workplace Surgery: The CEO's nephew applied - **Episode:** [186](https://agents.truthliesandwork.com/episodes/186.md) (2025-04-09) - **Type:** workplace-surgery - **Tags:** nepotism, hiring, workplace-dynamics - **Time:** 43:42–48:47 (start 2622s) - **Listen:** [https://truthliesandwork.com/186?t=2622](https://truthliesandwork.com/186?t=2622) --- [43:42] Al Elliott: So last week, our CEO casually mentioned his nephew had applied for a job in my department. Keep an eye out for Jamie's application, he said. He's just finished his master's in UX at a good university. Then yesterday, HR forwarded me Jamie's CV with a note saying the CEO asked us to expedite this one [43:57] Leanne Elliott: Oh, no [43:58] Al Elliott: Not particularly subtle. I've now interviewed Jamie, and to be fair, he's not unqualified. He's got the right degree, decent internships, seems genuinely passionate about UX. UX being user experience, I think. So he made our shortlist, but he wouldn't be our top pick. The 3 candidates we've already selected got great experience. They're perfect for him. However, I'm getting some not-so-subtle hints from the CEO and even my direct boss that Jamie would be a great cultural fit. And think about the relationship this could build with leadership. I know exactly what they're implying. If I don't hire Jamie, I risk damaging my relationship. If I do hire him over clearly more qualified candidates, I risk losing credibility with my team. I am stuck in a rock and a hard place. Leah [44:40] Leanne Elliott: This all comes down to the quality of the recruitment process you have in your organisation, how much that protects you in this situation. An evidence-led, robust recruitment process Is going to give you very objective criteria as to who's your number 1, 2, 3, and 4 candidates. They're essentially going to have almost a point score in terms of who is the best fit for that role within that organisation. If you have this in place, it's as simple as saying, it's, he wasn't the first pick. He did exceptionally well. He was shortlisted. He's our number 4 choice. That's just what the data shows us. That's just what the process has ended with. It is the way it is. Of course, very few organisations have this robust recruitment process in place, but by the sounds of it, there is a process in place that you've identified, you know, these, these candidates, and he is not one of the top 3. So, with that in mind, it's a, where do you want to compromise your integrity and what are you going to get out of it in the short and long term? I would always be more comfortable pissing off my leader than I am upsetting my team and undermining their view of me and their respect for me and, and that relationship. That's my day-to-day, that's my performance, that's my ongoing, um, effectiveness within this organization. Essentially, your leader's probably going to get over it, particularly if you big it up and we're like, oh my gosh, they were brilliant, and I really like this about Jamie, was it? [46:15] Al Elliott: Yeah, it was Jamie [46:15] Leanne Elliott: Yeah, really like this about Jamie, loved that. These are some development points I'd offer him in terms of feedback from the interview. These are some of the things that we didn't quite see that we did see in other candidates. What you should be doing anyway is a really great candidate experience in the recruitment process. And approach it like that. If ultimately you're then getting undermined or work is being made harder for you, then that's, that's a formal complaint. That's bullying, that's discrimination of some kind. That is not acceptable. That is not okay. In this moment, I will always be of the view that how can I defend this decision in a court of law, which I may well be taken to if, if, you know, it's deemed that unfair hiring practices are in place? Can I defend this decision? Can I look myself in the mirror and will my team still respect me? And for me, that's sorry, He didn't make the top 3. He's our number 4 choice. This is the feedback I'd give him to go into his next interviews with. We'd absolutely consider him again for future roles that he's qualified to do. And know that you're doing the right thing for Jamie, because if they're not the right person for the job, it ain't going to work out, for the person who is the right person for that job, and for the organisation's performance overall [47:31] Al Elliott: Yeah [47:32] Leanne Elliott: Saying no to nepotism [47:33] Al Elliott: Love it. I love it. I think the, um, just, just a little bit of, if, if you think about it from the leader's point of view, there's a very good chance that they've already, they've already promised Jamie the job going, oh yeah, yeah, dead easy. I'll just tell him to hire you. So going back to the, to the beginning where I was talking about because, if you can give a really sound reason why he's not gonna be a fit for the team right now, so you can use because, yet, you can use all those words I talked about. You can go back to them and also let this person save face a little bit, because if this leader goes back to Jamie, their cousin, or was it the nephew, and says, no, you can't get a job, and Jamie goes, but you said you could get me a job, which they probably have said, you can say, yes, but here's the feedback, and try again in a year when you've done XYZ. So I think that maybe going armed with lots and lots of becauses and using the word yet, I think is gonna be a very smart move here. Okay, so question number 3. They're faking being at their desks, but I never asked them to be there in the first place. So, this person writes, I've stumbled on something bizarre as a technical director at our digital marketing agency. While reviewing our network traffic for an infrastructure upgrade, this, okay, you didn't need to tell us that. I've discovered multiple team members using elaborate presence simulators. This is, um, I think mouse jigglers