Jeffrey L. Seglin's Blog, page 40

Give credit when words are borrowed

I regularly receive emails alerting me to news stories about incidents of plagiarism. These alerts aren't randomly sent to me. I set myself up to receive them. After reading the articles, I sometimes send out a tweet with a link to the story accompanied by "#plagiarism."
It's not with any sense of Schadenfreude that I continue to receive and continue to disseminate these pieces of plagiarism news. I write and teach writing for a living, so I am constantly looking for examples of people getting themselves caught up in plagiarism woes partly as a source of grist to share with my students.
Some instances of plagiarism are more egregious than others. Recently, the superintendent of schools for Ridgefield, Conn., ended up resigning after being caught "borrowing" words from the West Hartford, Conn., superintendent of schools in a letter that went out to parents about the shootings at Marjory Stoneham Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla.
It was a student, Paul Kim, at Ridgefield High School who discovered the plagiarism. Initially, it was reported that Kim was blocked from presenting information on the incident to the school board in Ridgefield. Only after the "Ridgefield Press" took up the issue did the board act.
In a video interview on The Hartford Courant's website, Kim observes correctly that members of the Ridgefield community should expect a higher level of "professionalism" than the act of plagiarism represents.
While any letter might have reflected similar concerns about school safety, lifting the words directly from someone else's work is not only unprofessional, it sends a horrible message to students that such word theft is OK.
The temptation though for the superintendent might be clear. When there's so much work to be done and one more letter to be sent to parents, seeking ways to leverage time by cutting and pasting from other sources might be attractive. The message still gets out to parents and the superintendent doesn't need to reinvent the wheel.
Whether it's a message about school safety, a note about snow days, or any written expression at all, using someone else's words without attributing them to the original source is wrong. It's plagiarism inside or outside of an academic setting.
It doesn't matter that no one loses any money when a sentence here and there are stolen and presented as original work. It doesn't matter if the sentiments written by a professional colleague reflect your own and you find that you couldn't have said or written it any better. In such cases as the latter, if those other words are so well-wrought, the right thing is to give the writer of them credit for having done so.
Given the emphasis on integrity in the classroom and among teachers and students, superintendents of schools should know better than to plagiarize. But so should lawyers, doctors, plumbers, therapists, architects, curators, baristas, bricklayers, funeral directors, and anyone else who commits writing.
Give credit when you borrow someone else's words. Call people out who take credit for words that are not their own. Use your words, but make sure they are indeed your own. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Just because it's legal, is it the right thing to do?

Almost 20 years ago, I started off a chapter of a book I wrote on business ethics with the observation that it's very possible for someone to make a perfectly legal decision without ever exploring the ethical aspects of that decision. Sometimes, I wrote, the law gives us an excuse to ignore whether the action we are taking is right or wrong.
I was reminded of this observation while reading reporter Connor Sheets' story in The Birmingham News about an Etowah County sherriff, Todd Entrekin, who apparently managed to abide by Alabama laws by keeping for personal use whatever funds allotted to food provisions for inmates. Over a three-year period, Sheets reports, Entrekin managed to sock away $750,000 in excess funds.
Some residents wondered how Entrekin and his wife had managed to amass real estate worth more than $1.7 million on his annual salary of $93,178.80. On the surface, it wouldn't be incomprehensible to believe that someone could have saved that much over the years and manage to invest wisely in real estate, which grew in value over time. But Entrekin's ability to make such purchases was undoubtedly made a bit easier by his ability to save on food provisions for Etowah County prisoners over the past three years.
If it's a perfectly legal maneuver, then what's the harm?
That's a question that many people might find themselves asking, although typically on a smaller scale. If a community is hit by a natural disaster, such as a flood or hurricane, for example, and all residents of the stricken community are offered free food and other forms of relief, what's the harm in residents whose homes weren't affected at all from availing themselves of free stuff? Legally, they reside in the same community as those who were left homeless and possession-less.
When those who aren't in need of the relief get in line because something is free to be had, there is less for those who are truly in need. From an ethical perspective, those who choose to cash in in such situations fail to take the time to assess the intent of the relief efforts, or simply allow self-interest to keep them from caring.
In the case of the Alabama sheriff, his choice might have been legal. But how much better might the food provisions have been for the inmates in his care? Entrekin told Sheets that "we utilize a registered dietitian to ensure adequate meals are provided daily." Even if the inmates food needs did not go wanting, how far could those $750,000 in taxpayer money have gone to addressing other needs of the community if any excess were turned over to the Etowah County?
Using the law to make questionable ethical decisions, which result in enriching ourselves, raises questions about our integrity, whether we are a county sheriff or a self-interested homeowner.
It's only after we ask ourselves whether the decisions we make might do any harm can we hope to do our thoughtful best to do the right thing. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Drilling down on patient loyalty

For more than 30 years, A.L. and her family visited the same dentist. Even after they moved a half-an-hour's drive away from the dentist, they continued to visit him for regular checkups and any dental work they needed over the years.
Last year, the family's dentist announced his retirement. He was selling his practice to another dentist whose office was in the same office park. The plan was for the old dentist to continue practicing for three months at the new owner's location as the patients who wanted to transition to the new dentist did so. After those three months passed, A.L. continued to book visits with the new dentist.
While A.L. loved her old dentist (words not often enough heard), she also was quite fond of the work his long-term dental hygienist did for routine checkups, cleanings, and X-rays. Even though the dentist was retiring, the plan was for his hygienist to keep working for the new owner of the dental practice. Because A.L. and her family liked working with the hygienist, they decided to keep making the twice-a-year schlep to get their teeth checked on and cleaned.
On the few instances A.L. interacted with the new dentist, she wasn't all that fond of his chair-side manner. "He was thorough," writes A.L., "but seemed a bit condescending and a bit abrupt with his hygienist."
Nevertheless, A.L. persisted in remaining a patient of the new dentist. If nothing else, she felt she was being loyal to her hygienist.
About a week ago, A.L. learned that her long-term hygienist had left the dental practice. Apparently, it just became too difficult for her to continue to deal with the new dentist's manner.
A.L. doesn't know for certain what happened to cause the hygienist to leave the practice. But now that she's gone, she feels as if there's no reason not to find a dentist closer to home.
"Would it be wrong to leave the new guy and give him the impression I didn't like him when I really haven't established any kind of relationship with him?" she asks.
A.L. has every right to find a new dentist for whatever reason she wants to find one. That she continued driving a half-hour to the new dentist showed a great sense of loyalty. But there are a few things in her question that suggest she knows the answer to her own question.
It doesn't really matter whether the dentist was condescending or abrupt or if A.L. misread his manner. (OK, it certainly does matter to those who have to work with him.) That fact that A.L. has been seeing him for more than a year now and hasn't established any kind of relationship with the new dentist is reason enough to decide it might be time to find someone else.
She might find it will take time to establish as strong a relationship she had with her old dentist even if she does leave the new guy and find someone else. But at least she can try to do so much closer to home. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

How much does house seller need to disclose?

When a reader we're calling "Alice" decided to sell her house, she did everything she could to get the house ready for prospective buyers to see. Several weeks of de-cluttering. Quite a few weekends taken up with a fresh coat of paint on some walls and baseboards. Alice also spent time making sure that broken outlet covers and switch plates were replaced.
After lugging several bags of items she no longer used to local charity thrift shops and books to her local library for its annual book sale, Alice did a thorough cleaning of her house and got it ready to go.
Her real estate broker worked with her to set a price and get the house on the market. Just before the first open house was to occur, Alice noticed that a wooden spindle on one of the railings on her outside porch appeared to be rotting a bit at its base. Rather than try to replace the spindle or hire someone to replace it for her, Alice decided to take an old tube of paintable caulk and to spread the caulk all over the base of the spindle to fill in where it seemed to be deteriorating. Once the caulk dried, she put a coat of white outdoor paint on the spindle so it matched the rest of the railing.
If you looked close enough, you could see the difference in texture, Alice writes. But it looked clean and fresh and she figured few people would notice her quick fix.
Now that Alice's house has been viewed by several interested buyers and her realtor has begun entertaining some offers to purchase the house, Alice is concerned she might be deceiving prospective buyers by not telling them about some things, such as the spindle, which a new owner might need to fix.
"Would I rest easier if I went through and made a punch list of all the things that need doing that I simply never got around to doing before putting the house on the market?" asks Alice. "Or is it OK for me to rest easy thinking that any prospective buyer will know no house is perfect?"
If there is something that might prove life threatening in her house to a new owner, Alice and her realtor would be wise to disclose that information. But she can rest easy about the patched-up spindle.
Most buyers will insist on an inspection prior to closing their purchase of a house. A licensed home inspector should be able to point out any defects which might prove costly to a new owner.
Providing a punch list of those items, which Alice wishes she had gotten around to, but just never did would not only be unnecessary, it would likely strike a prospective owner as odd.
The right thing is for Alice to get her house in as good shape as possible and not to mislead prospective buyers in the listing. Prospective buyers should go in with their eyes open and recognize that it is their responsibility to assess whether the house is one in which they want to invest and live. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Why the illusion of credibility can be an ethical bust

The importance of building credentials should not be underestimated. Some people work hard to gain life experiences, build companies, earn college degrees, perform community service, and commit to any number of opportunities designed to help both themselves and others grow.
A recent article written by Jason Zweig for The Wall Street Journal highlights the difference between building credibility and mastering the illusion of credibility. Zweig profiled an entrepreneur named Clint Arthur who for a charge of between $5,000 and $25,000 would provide people the opportunity to "claim to have given speeches at Harvard Business School or the U.S. Military Academy at West Point," even though "they weren't invited to speak by those leading universities."
Instead, Arthur would rent out space on prestigious campuses -- which almost anyone can do -- and hold private events there. Technically, the attendees will have spoken at Harvard or West Point. But then anyone going on a walking tour of either campus who happened to speak during the tour could, I suppose, claim the same thing. As Zweig points out, "more than a dozen financial advisers" claim to have given speeches at Harvard or West Point when the reality is that they had paid for the privilege of attending one of Clint Arthur's events.
Such stories of padding the resume to oomph up a sense of importance are not uncommon. But misrepresenting your experiences -- whether to land a client or land a job -- is wrong.
The effort to pad experiences to look better in an attempt to gain something in return starts early. Too often high school students are encouraged to create "brag sheets," which highlight all of their experiences and skills. The result can be used to show prospective college admissions officers just how engaged the student is and will be. Nothing wrong with that.
Where things go wrong is with the pressure to gain a list of experiences solely for the purpose of adding them to a brag sheet. A day visiting a soup kitchen so you can add "volunteered at soup kitchen" is not the same as regularly volunteering at the same soup kitchen throughout the year. Not making that distinction on a brag sheet can be as misleading as suggesting to prospective clients that you had been invited to speak at a prestigious university when the reality is that the university invited you nowhere and you wouldn't even have been let in the door without forking over serious cash to a third party holding an non-university-affiliated event.
So what's the right thing to do to build credibility, either as a high school student or as a young (or not-so-young) professional?
There is absolutely no need to be falsely humble about your accomplishments. In fact, it's wise to embrace your accomplishments and let others who might want to work with you know about them.
But the right thing is to avoid misleading people by suggesting you have done something you know you have not really done or that you have done more than you are leading them to believe. In other words, embrace your accomplishments, but make sure that that you've actually accomplished something. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Should I overlook a prospective employee's alleged flaws?

As his business has continued to grow, a business owner we'll call "Shelley" has found it challenging to find qualified employees to add to her team. Because it was still a small operation, she figures that it's important for her to get every hire right to avoid wreaking havoc on the rest of her workplace.
For several years, through trade shows and networking events, Shelley has known a fellow we're calling "Blake." Blake had a great reputation for the work he'd done for a much larger company doing similar work to Shelley's company, and for years Blake has expressed an interest in joining Shelley's company should an opportunity arise.
While she had heard from others about how solid a job Blake had done at his other positions, there were also rumblings that he might not be such a great colleague with whom to work. Shelley had no evidence that anything specific ever occurred, but suggestions that Blake was a bit of a bully to those workers reporting to him and hints that he might have made some employees uncomfortable by asking them on dates gave her pause.
"I need someone strong who can do the job," Shelley says. "No one has ever indicated that Blake can't do the type of work I would need him to do." Plus, she reports that Blake has always come across respectful and professional when she has met him.
Because she has several pending jobs that will require her to staff up her company quickly, Shelley feels some urgency in hiring on new employees.
Is it wrong, Shelley asks, to use these suspicions as a reason not to hire Blake, particularly when she needs to fill open positions at her company?
For many readers, it might come as no surprise that someone who has a bit of a reputation for behaving badly with employees who report to him or work alongside him manages to treat those to whom he reports quite well. Too many of us have witnessed colleagues who are excellent at "managing up" while miserable when it comes to the way they treat those who have little to no power of them in the workplace.
That may or may not be the case with Blake. Shelley simply doesn't know enough.
Shelley should do the same thing she does with any prospective hire and that's to seek references about his experience and qualifications. Rather than rely on random chatter about his strengths or weaknesses, she should check each out. If she has any reservation whatsoever about Blake's or any other prospective employee's ability to behave appropriately in the workplace, she should pass on making the hire.
If she believes any prospective employee's bad behavior should be overlooked because he's good at his job, she risks creating a hostile environment for her existing employees and jeopardizing her company's prospects for the long-term.
When screening prospective employees, the right thing is to do as thorough a job in screening them as possible and not to overlook significant flaws simply because there's a desperate need to get someone in place to do the job. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Am I wrong to aid a fare evader?

I ride the subway to work. Early each morning, I walk the two blocks to the station on the Red Line of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) subway, board a train heading toward the Alewife station, and take the T the 10 stops it takes to get to work. Each evening, I reverse the route and ride the Red Line train home, heading toward the Ashmont station.
In the winter, the train schedule tends to be a bit less predictable. Frequent delays make getting to and from work more of an adventure. On occasion, I've tweeted out plaintive haikus to the MBTA Twitter handle. Occasionally, I receive a response, sometimes even in poetic form. The MBTA and I now follow one another on Twitter, and we've occasionally exchanged direct messages to one another.
On two occasions over the past month -- once going to work and one arriving home from work -- passengers have engaged my assistance in trying to enter the subway platform without paying their train fare.
On the first occasion, at about 6 a.m., a young woman asked me if she could follow me in through the turnstiles since she had left her pre-paid T pass at home. No one was in the small glassed-in office where T personnel typically sit to assist passengers. It was cold outside. I said nothing, but didn't prevent her from following me in.
On the second occasion, I arrived home to my neighborhood T station around 7:45 p.m. Again no one was in the T office nor were any T personnel around. But an older gentleman turned toward me from the machine where you can put more money on your T card and shouted out, "Walk slowly so I can get in before the turnstile door closes. The machine's not working." Again, I said nothing, but didn't prevent him from rushing by me to catch the train.
In each instance, it was wrong for the passenger to enter the platform without paying. If caught, the first offense for fare evasion is $50. The second offense is $100, and all subsequent offenses are $300. (The fare each way is $2.25 if you put money on a CharlieCard and $2.75 if you buy a paper ticket.)
Wondering if I could be fined as well, I sent the MBTA a direct message on Twitter. There is no fine for letting another customer into the station, I was told. Fines are only applied to the evader. But I was encouraged to report the person to the MBTA Transit Police via Twitter, a phone number, or a "See Say" app.
I will be doing none of those things.
The right thing is for commuters to remember their passes or to try to purchase tickets. But the right thing is also for the MBTA to have the personnel in the office at the station to provide assistance when fare machines don't work or when a forgetful commuter wants to ask for help. (I've forgotten my pass on occasion and the MBTA attendant has let me through.)
If the MBTA wants commuters to do the right thing, then being on hand to help them do so seems fair to ask. Not just on blustery cold days, but every day. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Am I obligated to try to save former colleague from embarrassment?

Alan, a former colleague of Tim, was searching for a job. As part of his search effort, Alan was contacting many former colleagues, including Tim, to let them know he was looking Sometimes Alan was emailing and sometimes he was connecting through social media websites such as LinkedIn, where he knew many former colleagues had set up their own pages.
Tim didn't know Alan well, but they had worked together briefly several years earlier. When he received an alert on LinkedIn that Alan had sent him a note, he read it and, because he really didn't know of any leads for the type of positing for which Alan was looking, he figured no response was necessary.
But curious to know what Alan had been up to since they had worked together, he decided to take a look at Alan's profile page. Tim was pleased to see that Alan had had some good success advancing in his career at several companies.
Tim also noticed, however, that Alan had several glaring typos on the part of his LinkedIn page that replicated his professional resume. They were the kind of typos that a spellchecker would not likely flag since the mistyped word was actually a real word, just not the one Alan intended. In some cases, the typos were innocuous. In a few others, the mistyped word resulted in featuring a word that might cause embarrassment if Alan knew what he'd typed. In all cases, Tim thought, the typos might suggest to a prospective employer that Alan was sloppy with detail.
"Since I don't have any real leads to offer," Tim asks, "should I contact Alan to let him know of the typos?" Tim writes that he'd had to think that Alan has similar typos in the resume he's been sending off to prospective employers. "I don't want to embarrass Alan or to sound like I'm judging him."
Tim has no obligation to let Alan know about the typos on his LinkedIn page. Nevertheless, letting Alan know about them would be the right thing to do. If the roles were reversed, Tim, or most anyone else, would want someone to alert them to such potentially embarrassing errors, particularly in the midst of a job search.
There's no reason Tim should feel bad that he responds to Alan not with the information on possible jobs he asked, but with a note wishing him well and calmly alerting him to the fact that he noticed a few potentially embarrassing typos on his LinkedIn profile. If Alan doesn't respond, that's on him. But Alan should acknowledge such a response and thank Tim or whoever else might point out the errors to him. It's not only in Alan's best interest to show courtesy when he is in the process of reaching out to others for help, it's the right thing to do anytime a friend or colleague tries to help.
Trying to be helpful to a former colleague by pointing out errors that might derail his job search is not judgmental. It's something I'd hope anyone, regardless of whether they could land me a plum new position, would point out to me or anyone of you should we find ourselves in Alan's position. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

When flu hits, employees deserve privacy

Flu season is upon us and apparently this year's flu is an even more virulent strain than some of those in the recent past. In late January, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that all "states but Hawaii continue to report widespread flu activity." Stories of friends and colleagues being felled by the flu are running rampant.
A small business owner in the Midwest reported on his social media feed that a worker had been out with the flu for several days. When he returned to work, he collapsed and was rushed to the hospital. Concerned, the business owner wrote a short cautionary note to his social media followers that they make sure to take care of themselves and not to rush recovery. He reported that he planned a thorough wipe-down of surfaces in his office with disinfectant in hopes of derailing the flu from spreading among his owner workers, or him.
A reader of the column brought the post to my attention, wondering if the owner might have gone too far with his post. Of particular concern was that he mentioned the employee's first name.
"Even if he posted out of concern for others," the reader wrote, "isn't his post some sort of violation of privacy?"
The reader wants to know if the owner was wrong to make his post. But he also wants to know if he should say anything to the owner since, while he doesn't work for him, he's known him for many years.
I preface my response by disclosing that I am neither an attorney nor an expert in state or federal health care disclosure laws. While it might be illegal for a health care worker to disclose a patient's information, it's not entirely clear to me that it would be illegal for an employer to let others in his workplace know that an employee was ill.
But even if there's no legal violation, the right thing is to respect an employee's privacy, particularly if a post is made to a social media account that is available to the public. If he wanted to caution others by posting about his workplace experience with the flu, he could have done so without mentioning the employee's first name.
While my reader has no obligation to do so, he would not be out of line to call or text his acquaintance and suggest he might want to edit his post and remove the employee's name. Granted, the deed is already done and those who have already read the owner's post cannot now unsee what they've already seen. But the right thing for the owner to do would be to either take down the post entirely or to edit it so that his employee felled by the flu is not identifiable.
Having an employee out sick is always a concern for a small business owner. Having an employee return to work, only to collapse and be rushed to a hospital emergency is a real concern. But even if in a moment of panic and concern, the owner felt it necessary to post a warning to others, he should have taken the time to respect the privacy of each of his employees. 
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues. 
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net. 
F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Should I remind prospect of past slights?

Fifteen years ago, M.N. was looking for a job. In his early 40s at the time, he was trying to make a bit of a career shift so he knew that landing a job in a new field might be a challenge. But he was convinced that the skills he had acquired were transferrable to a new line of work. So he set out on his search.
Friends and acquaintances in his newly desired field advised M.N. They gave him recommendations on what he might do to strengthen the possibility of a successful landing. They provided him with names of people with whom he might network.
With some persistence, he considered himself lucky to schedule an appointment with Q.L., an executive in a company, which did the type of work M.N. wanted to do. At first it was difficult to get a response from Q.L. and even after he did, M.N. found it a challenge to book time with him. But Q.L.'s assistant finally responded to M.N. and told him that Q.L. could fit him in.
M.N. got to Q.L.'s office a bit early and was prepared to wait. But the time for the appointment came and he found himself still waiting. That was fine, he figured. Q.L. was, after all, meeting him as a favor to provide him some advice on his search for new work.
Finally, a half-hour after the scheduled time, Q.L.'s assistant led M.N. to his office, which was empty. Q.L. arrived, shook M.N.'s hand, and sat down. After about 10 minutes of answering a few questions about the type of employee Q.L.'s company was looking for, Q.L. cut the meeting short and apologized to M.N. that he would need to leave to get to his next appointment. To M.N., the episode felt dismissive with Q.L. offering little in the way of encouragement.
M.N. put the episode behind him and a few months later was able to land a job doing precisely the kind of work he wanted to do. Over the past 15 years, he successfully moved his way up the company.
At an industry trade show recently, M.N. was giving a talk. After he finished several of the attendees waited to ask him questions. One who waited was Q.L., who approached M.N. and asked him about opportunities within his company. He responded, but it was clear Q.L. had no recollection of having met with M.N. 15 years earlier.
That evening, M.N. received an email from Q.L., reminding him about his question and expressing how much he enjoyed M.N.'s talk and that he would really like to find a way to work with him at his company.
While his company didn't have any openings, M.N. now wonders whether he should remind Q.L. that they had met before, hoping it jars his memory of how dismissive he had been when M.N. sought his help. "Or should I just tell him we have no openings right now?"
Little would be gained by settling an old score, particularly since Q.L. might not have perceived himself as being as dismissive as M.N. remembers. He did after all make time to meet with M.N. The right thing is to simply thank Q.L. for his interest and let him know there are no openings at his company right now.

Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice, is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.

Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net.

F ollow him on Twitter: @jseglin  
(c) 2018 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.