Promising Practices Promising PracticesPromising Practices
A forum for government's best ideas and most innovative leaders.

How to Avoid Hiring Selfish People


Adam Grant is something of a prodigy in the business-school world. He’s Wharton’s youngest full professor, and its highest-rated teacher. His claim—outlined in last year’s bestselling Give and Take—that helping others leads to more success than focusing only on getting ahead individually was profiled in a cover story by the New York Times Magazine, alongside his own efforts to be a singularly helpful and productive colleague and teacher.

The book divides people into givers, matchers, and takers. Givers help people, share credit, and mentor colleagues, without the expectation of payback. Matchers give when they think they’ll get something equal in return. Takers are the most selfish, and act in a way that comes at the expense of others.

In the year since the book came out, one of the big questions that Grant has worked on with companies (his clients include Goldman Sachs and Google) is how to avoid hiring takers. “The negative impact of a taker on a culture is usually double or triple the positive impact of giver,” Grant told Quartz.

So his work with companies has focused on building a selection and interview process that weeds them out.

Step 1: Don’t keep reference checks confined to people’s ex-bosses

Most reference checks work to a taker’s advantage, Grant says.

“Most job references come from bosses. The problem with that is that takers are very good at kissing up. It’s hard to rely on a reference that comes from above because takers usually put their best foot forward with those people.”

Candidates want their references to seem authoritative, so they list former managers. And people in leadership are likely to seek out data on someone’s performance from that perspective. But much more useful for screening out selfish people are references from their peers and they people they themselves managed.

“Takers tend to be less careful at managing impressions with those people because they feel like they’re more powerful,” Grant says, “so you get to see more of their true colors.”

Step 2: Build a better behavioral interview

The behavioral interview, which includes specific questions about past behavior, has become standard practice at many companies.  Many common questions focus on a candidate’s successes, and how they overcame any stumbling blocks on the way.

“If you want to find out if someone’s a taker it’s not actually that useful to know what they’ve accomplished,” Grant says. “What you want to want to know is how they explain them.”

That’s where you start to find differences, and can begin to screen selfish people out. Takers, Grant says, are more likely to use “I and me” constructions and take personal credit. Givers share credit for group accomplishments. Interviewers should also ask about specific instances of failure.

“When takers talk about mistakes, they’re usually quick to place the blame on other people,” Grant says. “Givers are more likely to say ‘Here’s the mistake I made, I learned the following from it. Here are the steps I’m taking to make sure I don’t let people down in the future.’”

Following these steps doesn’t just help you avoid hiring selfish employees, Grant says; it helps make the entire company more generous. If there are no takers around, givers won’t worry as much about being exploited—making them even more likely to act as givers—and matchers (the largest group of people), who tend to follow whatever the workplace norm is, won’t have bad examples to imitate.

Reprinted with permission from Quartz. The original story can be found here

(Image via Singkham/

Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.