To be fair, the applicant "slammed" Zenefits by saying that having their name on his resume would be less valuable than others when applying FOR A NEW JOB (my emphasis).
If an employee applied to work for my business and one of their "concerns" was how our company would appear on their resume (in contrast to another), I would similarly discard their application.
The mistake wasn't the hiring decision, clearly it was getting into an argument with a prospective employee in a public internet posting.
That shows a serious lack of judgement and poor leadership.
And moreover this isn't a photo sharing business he's running, when you're asking people to trust you with their income and their medical coverage you are going to be held to a higher standard.
What if the argument took place privately? Is the mistake the venue, the participation or the action/argument itself? The applicant invited a public debate - should the CEO just avoid the debate and let it play out?
> should the CEO just avoid the debate and let it play out?
Yes. Getting into acrimonious debate with a prospective junior hire about their future career prospects is almost the definition of a misplaced sense of priority.
I am leaning to agreeing with you, however (in the spirit of debate) there are many examples of successful CEO's who meddle in seemingly unimportant matters due to their personal obsession/work ethic etc.
It's a not a good sign when your CEO argues with a "junior hire", however if he's successful at growing the company and creating value, it will be painted as part of his winning formula.
I disagree. I'm not promising someone a job for life and they're not promising to work for me forever. Part of the value I offer them as an employee is what I can do for their career going forward. Sometimes that's a prestigious name, other times it's by giving them better opportunities to grow. It's one thing to say "I want people who want to work here," it's another to discount people who might want one day want to work someplace else.
Of course nothing lasts forever, however it's somewhat a bad sign to a see an employee actively planning their next move, before they've even accepted an offer. It shows the applicant may be more concerned about career path than they are in doing an excellent job for their current employer. It might be an outdated or romantic view of work, but the ideal situation (employes and ownership working towards a shared goal) is still worth striving for.
If a potential employee was concerned about name recognition with my startup, and I REALLY wanted her join, I'd double down on my pitch of how we're all passionate about making a huge (name-brand-worthy) contribution to the world, and her help will make a difference.
Really? Whenever I discuss my career with my employer (a startup much smaller than Zenefits), they're always the first to bring up potential future employers.
If an employee applied to work for my business and one of their "concerns" was how our company would appear on their resume (in contrast to another), I would similarly discard their application.