Would you hire the hobbyist?

[z/m(Ret)]

Core question-->Should the VP hire the hobbyist?
Corollary question 1-->What is the likelihood that a candidate's hobbying history will be known to the interviewer?

Actually the core question, according to me, was "Is a hobbyist particularly fit or unfit to be an executive employee?"

Regarding the core question, I feel we have discussed the issue of risk to the company posed by the candidate's hobbying history. I don't feel however that we have come to a serious conclusion about whether a candidate's hobbying might be considered somehow advantageous to the company.

True. I see this question produce two categories of answers. One category would have to do with a specific set of corporate practices, one of which would be "showing clients a good time". Another category would respond to what I think would be a relevant question: "What hobby-experience knowledge can be extrapolated into corporate knowledge?" The process would require a transformation (or, better, an adaptation) of the hobby experience so it can be made useful to address corporate situations. (analogy: playing soccer contribute to improve tennis skills)

Frankly, I am surprised Ziggy and t76 that you find the likelihood of an employee's history becoming known to be so slim. My experience tells me the situation is just the opposite. I can present two frameworks within which a candidate's hobbying history would become known:

First, as described above, the company or an industry virtually integrates into its culture a sexual-entertainment component.

Here, you just introduced a new element to the premises and, by doing so, a contradiction as well. If I read the opening statements correctly, the corporate environment the hobbyist candidate was introduced to was not completely positive over the perspective of hiring a hobbyist. The mere fact that the question "Should the VP hire the hobbyist or not?" indicate that candidates indulging in hobby activities are suspects.

Now you present a different environment, one that has positively integrated the sex-entertainment culture into its own corporate practices. In this context, yes, you are correct, chances that everyone else's nightly dalliances with strippers, escorts, etc. become known to peers are indeed high, the reason for that being "everyone does it".

Now the problem is: "if everyone does it, why then would a VP be possibly reluctant (as the seminal post suggested) to hire a hobbyist? The question becomes irrelevant by the fact that the VP himself is probably a hobbyist.

 

[Fat Happy Buddha]

Actually the core question, according to me, was "Is a hobbyist particularly fit or unfit to be an executive employee?"

Thank you for making that clarification. It is very helpful.

Another category would respond to what I think would be a relevant question: "What hobby-experience knowledge can be extrapolated into corporate knowledge?"

This is by far the more interesting question. As I said above, we have discussed in detail what might make a candidate unfit. It is now time to seriously consider how hobby experience might be useful or, as you stated very precisely, "What hobby-experience knowledge can be extrapolated into corporate knowledge?" I will mull this question over and try to give my opinion this evening.

Frankly, I am surprised Ziggy and t76 that you find the likelihood of an employee's history becoming known to be so slim. My experience tells me the situation is just the opposite. I can present two frameworks within which a candidate's hobbying history would become known:.....

Here, you just introduced a new element to the premises and, by doing so, a contradiction as well. ....

Now the problem is: "if everyone does it, why then would a VP be possibly reluctant (as the seminal post suggested) to hire a hobbyist? The question becomes irrelevant by the fact that the VP himself is probably a hobbyist.

I would like to clarify that the statement I made was primarily a response to statements by you and t76 that indicated you felt such a situation [i.e., an interviewee being aware of a candidate's hobbying] was an improbable scenario. I suggested frameworks in which knowledge of the candidate's escapades might make its way to an interviewer. However, I was not introducing a new question and I don't think we should digress into the question of how such a scenario could come about. I admit though that I was headed down that trail myself. Let's just assume for the time being that there are multitidinous ways in which such a scenario could arise.


To recap, let's agree that the main question to be examined for the moment is "What hobby-experience knowledge can be extrapolated into corporate knowledge?"

 

[jacep]

Not to mention wax. Men should feel lucky they only have to shave their face instead of the 50% of their body we have to shave to be nice and soft for you

Well, actually waxing isn't all that bad. When I first had it done (someone did it for me), it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. I wouldn't do it myself, that is painful. I'm not talking from experience since I've never attempted to wax myself before, I'm just remembering the pain from pulling a bandaid from my leg.

Those who will rebut with 'I shave my chest', please know you are doing that for nothing if the intent is attracting the female species. (edited note: I'm not saying 'hairless' men don't turn on women, but the thought that it isn't natural does, i suspect, turn off most)

(if you're a swimmer or some other athlete who needs to be aerodynamic, then ok )

Even though I don't/didn't have a lot of body hair naturally (probably because of ethnicity/genetics), I'm one of those guys that used to shave, then switched to using cream, then went for waxing, and then laser. Contrary to what commericials and laser technicians say, laser does hurt. Since I've experienced both laser and waxing (in the same area), I would say that laser hurts more than waxing.

I don't like body hair for 2 reasons. One for the look and the other for swimming (although I'm not an athlete by any means).

As a man, we do appreciate all the pain of hair removal that women go through to look nice for us

 

[jacep]

I would not not hire a hobbyist just like I would not not hire a SP or person from the adult entertainment industry (stripper, etc.) where the only purpose that the person used to (or still) partakes in the activity.

This is assuming 2 points. The first is that I know for a fact 100% the person is a hobbyist/SP and the second is I am in a hiring position.

 

[Techman]

What's the difference between hiring someone in the hobby or hiring someone who goes out to singles bars a couple times a week and picks up someone for a random fuck? The guy who cruises bars probably spends at least as much money if not more than the guy who just saves time and calls for takeout. I won't even bother with the morality question of married vs single hobbiests. Every one has different moral beliefs and some men hobby with the approval of their SOs. It wouldn't surprise me if some marriages have actually been saved by the hobby. Where I think a problem could arise is if someone is truly addicted to the hobby and it begins to affect his everyday life. But this could become a problem with any kind of addiction whether it be to the hobby, drugs, gambling, or anything else.

 

[z/m(Ret)]

Comapany 1: They sell animal crackers and other food products targeted towards children. This companies clientel are most likely to be families, religious nuts, moralists, etc as well as their stock holders. In this case they can not hire the hobbiest as this might come into conflect with the companies image and offend the target market.

Company 2: A beer company who's clientel are predomitly people like those on this board. In that case it would not matter as we tend to be more open minded.

I'm not sure about pet owners being religious nuts, etc. and neither am I sure that beer drinkers are necessarly into venal sex, but you are correct on the general idea: not every type of corporate environment would have the same level of tolerance towards hobbyists.

 

[z/m(Ret)]

To recap, let's agree that the main question to be examined for the moment is "What hobby-experience knowledge can be extrapolated into corporate knowledge?"

What skills and qualities are minimally required to be a (succesfull) hobbyist? Reseach capabilities? People skills? Punctuality? Charisma? Outgoing? Sense of humour? Likes to party? Dresses nice? Open minded? Polite? Holds doors for the ladies? Romantic? Patient? Has good manners? Has a cute butt? Can spell? (forrgait dat wan)... Seriously, there's a whole logistic underlying the hobby and a whole set of prerequisites to be a hobbyist.

How about this as a starter: a good hobbyist knows how to get his money worth.

 

[The family guy]

Ziggy Boy

Hey Ziggy, you still didnt get banned here yet........NEWBIE

 

[z/m(Ret)]

What's the difference between hiring someone in the hobby or hiring someone who goes out to singles bars a couple times a week and picks up someone for a random fuck?

From a practical standpoint, the two activities share the same logistic with, perhaps, a few variations. From the ethical standpoint, it's reasonable to think that one activity is more stigmatized than the other one, at least in the Western culture.

It wouldn't surprise me if some marriages have actually been saved by the hobby.

Brilliant!

Where I think a problem could arise is if someone is truly addicted to the hobby and it begins to affect his everyday life. But this could become a problem with any kind of addiction whether it be to the hobby, drugs, gambling, or anything else.

As it stands, internet addiction is certainly costing more to corporations than SP, strippers, etc. addictions.

 

[z/m(Ret)]

I would not not hire a hobbyist just like I would not not hire a SP or person from the adult entertainment industry (stripper, etc.) where the only purpose that the person used to (or still) partakes in the activity.

This is assuming 2 points. The first is that I know for a fact 100% the person is a hobbyist/SP and the second is I am in a hiring position.

Care to expand on the reasons why you would not?

 

[eastender]

Would You Hire a Professional Who is a Hobbyist

Let's broaden the question.

Would you hire(personally or corporately) a professional - lawyer,accountant, etc who you knew to be a hobbyist.

Re-ask the question: " .... to be an alcoholic, drug user, have been suspended by their professional association for misconduct?"

 

[jacep]

Care to expand on the reasons why you would not?

If you read my post carefully, it has 2 "not"s. What I meant to say is that I could care less if the person is a hobbyist or a SP. For me, this does not factor into any equation for job hiring or for anything else. The only time I would use this is if I met the hobbyist or SP before and they did something either positive or negative that I liked or disliked but then I would do this for all people.

 

[John_Cage]

Well, I think while it's TRUE that a person's personal life should not be taken into consideration because it's personal. However, that only happens in a "perfect world".

While I respect his hobby, I would think ONLY of myself. Is he going to be reliable? Even if he's 99.999% reliable (compare to non-hobbyist), I would take the 0.001% advantage that the non-hobbyist offers. The image of the company is very important (unless it's IN the escorting business, than hiring someone who knows the rope would be better).

Basicly, I won't judge him; but I sure as hell don't care about being fair to him. I just want the best for my company.

 

[Big Daddy Cool]

As Ziggy mentioned in another post, the bottom line (profits) is what matters most.

Ziggy:
Animal crackers are not pet food. What I ment was cookies sold for children shaped as animals as well as other shapes. I remember eating them as a kid, but what I was aiming at was the type of business that's targeting children and families. Sorry for the confusion.

By the way you are right on target about the coporate environment being more or less tolerant and that beer drinkers not nessarly being sex crazed people. I meant that as an over generalization to deministrate the differences of target markets affecting the level of tolerance accepted by the corporation.

 

[eastender]

The Best .............

1)If his qualifications were in order , and he had experiance of my type of business absolutely..without question.

2)No..been there(not me) ... done that. Don't need trouble.

I am guessing that there are a few professionals on this board. Everyone should know at least one...who just hasn't showed up here..yet.. .

The best person for the job within the financial constraints imposed by budgets balanced against possible fall-out - public perception etc.

Those who have been suspended by their professional associations should be avoided.

The issue of hiring a former alcoholic or person with a substance abuse problem is trickier. In situations where first hand knowledge of such issues
is a plus there may be advantages. In situations where such previous weaknesses may be exploited it would be difficult.

 

[jacep]

Let's broaden the question.

Would you hire(personally or corporately) a professional - lawyer,accountant, etc who you knew to be a hobbyist.

Well, I would not not hire them on the sole basis that I knew for a fact that they were a hobbyist (2 nots again). As I previously mentioned, it is a non-factor for me. If I was in a hiring position and I didn't hire them for the only reason that he/she is a hobbyist, I would be saying that I wouldn't hire myself since I'm a professional (although not one of the professionals that you mentioned). By professional, I mean that I am a member of an order and among other things I am one of the groups/individuals that are able to sign as guarantors for Canadian passports until the Canadian government loosens the rules in August.

Re-ask the question: " .... to be an alcoholic, drug user, have been suspended by their professional association for misconduct?"

Now, this is a different and more difficult question for me to answer. I think it would depend on a few issues as well as whether I felt that it would affect their ability to do the job. This also applies to a professional being suspended by their professional order.

Those who have been suspended by their professional associations should be avoided.

For me, it would depend on why the professional was suspended.

 

[Dee]

it has 2 "not"s. What I meant to say is that I could care less if the person is a hobbyist or a SP.

Interetsing ...to read this literally.... always a tricky phrase... probably could have used another "not"...