Hiring a CISO? Screen for Ethics & Integrity

Steve, - Soft skills are difficult to ascertain since it is easy for someone to act out what they know an employer would want. What with the numerous advise columns on how to pass that interview. On the other hand i agree with you sometimes excess rigidity with pay scales may not be so good. It is better to leave it open but knowing what the company budget is...you never know who comes along and maybe the budget can actually be adjusted without them having to cheat.

So right Steve. I had the same thought when I saw some of those ads. Softer skills are much harder to teach unless we get them very early in their careers - as student interns or fresh college grads. I think looking for ethics, integrity and a strong history of prior learning and adaptation is far more important than specific skills.  Everyone has to learn and adapt in a new job and continue learning if they are to be successful in the technology field.

@Mansur - what's with those extremely specific ads? I've seen several in recent months that I read and thought "well, here's a needle in a haystack!" I wonder how in the world can they be so specific and expect to fill it that way, since we all probably know that often with hiring there's a "close enough" candidate that gets hitched to a learning curve on the job. I've never seen it for softer skills or attributes like ethics or integrity but still wonder.

@Steve - yes I completely agree with you.  Technology changes so rapidly that screening for past learning history and ethics and integrity is more important that what version of some software they know.  Yet I see many job ads with too many specific requirements that will be difficult to find in a single candidate and these position remain unfilled for a long time.  Not sure why organizations have become less willing to allow some learning time in a job.

@Brian - appreciate you provoking the conversation. You made me think of a point from the hiring company side -- using salary range as a screening tool in a position as sensitive as a CISO was a mistake.  Organizations should focus on the right candidate and be willing to pay market salary or it will be difficult to retain the top candidates in these high demand and difficult to fill positions.

MANSUR - I feel that looking for truthful, direct responses is something we may look for in any position hiring. Though hardly limited or a must only for CISO positions, screening for integrity and ethics is the norm these days )thank goodness) and the higher on the ladder you climb the more important and vital these (and other) qualities are.

Tests may be good but I think a good interviewer can be the "lie detector" especially in a sensitive position.

Good article.

SLFISHER - I see it as you do - although not unethical (in my book anyway) I do see it as unwise and imprudent. I don't see how the "new" company could find out why the candidate did this (create the hostage situation) although it is possible to see this from an outside, seeing both sides of the transaction POV.

I think this happens fairly frequently - and you are correct, this was a technique that was promoted in the past. Hard to NOT  do this during an interview, or else why would you want to change companies?

Right, and Mansur, I'm just trying to provoke conversation.

Don't you think that if the candidate went through these stages and the company never felt that it was a possibility he would bail, maying they need a CISO even more than they thought they did before?  I still say it says something about the company, too.

At the simplest level look for direct and truthful responses to questions. At the complex level, you can administer tests that analyze ethics, perform background checks, verification etc.

Okay. How?

And I have to agree -- I don't see that what the applicant did was unethical, either trying to negotiate a higher salary with the hiring firm, or with the existing firm. I agree he may have ended up burning his future with both companies, but a lot of people are schooled to do exactly those things when applying for a job.

And, he may have fully intended to take the job and it was only after his company found out he was leaving that they were *then* willing to pay the raise he'd already asked for and been denied.